Download pdf - A Decommissioning Renaissance - HPS Chaptershpschapters.org/florida/1spring.pdfnuclear power plant decommissioning Nuclear decommissioning is being driven by 1\⤀ 䴀愀爀欀攀琀

$Page 1: A Decommissioning Renaissance - HPS Chaptershpschapters.org/florida/1spring.pdfnuclear power plant decommissioning Nuclear decommissioning is being driven by 1\⤀ 䴀愀爀欀攀琀$
A Decommissioning Renaissance

Eric W. Abelquist, Executive Vice President

Florida Chapter Health Physics Society Cape Canaveral, FL April 10, 2015

Presenter

Presentation Notes

The Nuclear Renaissance has not lived up to expectations… though we are encouraged by the new nuclear build in the US

Next Generation HP - Solomon

2

Decommissioning over the past 20 years • U.S. built decommissioning leadership

in environmental cleanup and nuclear power plant D&D

• NRC decommissioning rulemaking (1997) and related guidance (MARSSIM) in late 1990s supported 1st decommissioning wave – Trojan, CY, MY, Yankee Rowe, Big

Rock Point, Rancho Seco • 20-year plant extensions swept

through the industry, shifting the decommissioning timeline

• Decommissioning industry is mature—and on the precipice of sustained worldwide growth

3

Presenter

Presentation Notes

In 2000 we were looking ahead to 2010 to 2015 as a bow wave in decommissioning nuclear plants when ~30 plants would reach 40 y lifetimes Of course what happened instead was 20-y plant extensions, pushing D&D back two decades (2030 to 2035)… NRC has granted license renewals providing a 20-year extension to a total of 74 of the 100 operating reactors in the United States…and currently reviewing license renewal applications for 17 reactors (U.S. Energy Information Administration) That said, 60 y lifetimes may not be achieved for all NPPs

Operational worldwide reactors by age (source: IAEA Power Reactor Information System)

4

More than 50% of operational reactors worldwide are > 30 y

Presenter

Presentation Notes

So here’s the world view on nuclear reactors…like Baby Boomers reaching retirement, operational reactors in large numbers are approaching the end of their lifetimes From a decommissioning perspective, since every nuclear power plant ever built is already in the decommissioning pipeline (that’s ~ 435 or so…one for every member of Congress), net effect of premature shuttering is that plants are moving up in the pipeline. So those of us focused on longer-range planning – e.g., we perform IV of nuclear plant D&D for the NRC, what looked like a significant increase of independent verification work in from 2025 to 2030 with several closures per year has moved closer

Projected surge in retiring nuclear plants (source: International Energy Agency)

5

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Pace of retirements implies a huge surge in decommissioning projects About 200 of the 434 nuclear reactors in the world operational at the end of 2013 are retired by 2040, with the majority in Europe, the United States, Russia and Japan. [Note that this is cumulative graph] The decommissioning renaissance has not been lost on industry leaders. Bechtel and Westinghouse have launched a partnership to provide tailored decontamination, decommissioning and remediation (DD&R) services to US nuclear power plants. International Energy Agency (IEA) estimates the cost of decommissioning the nuclear plants expected to be retired by 2040 at over $100 billion.

Decommissioning is a growth industry

• Decommissioning is on the cusp of an impressive surge both in the U.S. and internationally

• Lucrative niche for years to come

• Fukushima Daiichi has led to an uptick in international decommissioning

6

Cheap natural gas (shale gas developments)

Slack demand for electricity

Uptick in uranium prices due to increasing global demand

Market factors driving premature nuclear power plant decommissioning

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Nuclear decommissioning is being driven by 1) Market factors (in the US) and 2) as a consequence of Fukushima incident (internationally). Premature nuclear plant shutdowns contributing to U.S. decommissioning – utilities will tap into their decommissioning funds sooner than planned Market Factor explanation - Nuclear power cannot compete well in competitive wholesale electricity markets – and about 50% of our nuclear fleet operate in these merchant markets. That is, these markets are not producing price signals that appropriately value large-scale, reliable, clean electricity. So these merchant plants in unregulated markets will not fare well w/o intervention to fix electricity markets

What’s driving nuclear power plant decommissioning?

Shutdown due to market factors:

• Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant in WI

• Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant

• Exelon considering closing some of its nuclear

stations due to market conditions—reportedly

losing $1 B over the past 5 years

Aggressive competition:

• Competitive markets undervalue major attributes of nuclear power plants—

nuclear power’s clean, reliable, base-load electricity cannot compete with

spot market prices for natural gas and subsidized renewables

7

Shutdown due to equipment issues:

• Crystal River Nuclear Plant in FL

• San Onofre Nuclear Generating

Station Units 2 and 3

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Shutting down perfectly good reactors that contribute emission-free, base-load electricity to the grid is NOT good for U.S. Period.

Timing matters—DECON vs. SAFSTOR

8

Not all decommissioning is market-driven…planned DECON continues at Humboldt Bay Power Plant and Zion Nuclear Facility

SAFSTOR is an attractive option when decommissioning funds insufficient

Vermont Yankee may sit for decades while its radioactive components cool and its decommissioning fund grows

Presenter

Presentation Notes

An important factor when talking about a decommissioning renaissance is the decommissioning option selected - DECON vs. SAFSTOR. SAFSTOR, or deferred dismantlement, can push back D&D and ultimate restoration of the site for decades (NRC requires decommissioning to be completed within 60 y of shutdown). Humboldt Bay entered SAFSTOR in 1985. Vermont Yankee expected to cost nearly $1.25 billion to dismantle the plant, which likely won't occur until the 2040s or later.

Internationally, nuclear decommissioning is picking up steam… not from fission

• 10 Magnox reactors in the UK

• Germany plans to shutter all 20 of its nuclear power plants (NPPs) by 2022

• Belgium and Switzerland planning phase out of their nuclear plants (2025 and 2034, respectively)

• France has 13 experimental and power reactors slated for decommissioning—9 reactors currently undergoing DECON

• Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station—and many of Japan’s nuclear fleet may be prematurely decommissioned

9

&

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Besides the U.S., decommissioning hot spots include UK, Germany, France and Japan In fact, UK probably leads the world in nuclear decommissioning today due to Magnox reactor decommissioning program (10 reactors) Switzerland has 5 nuclear reactors generating 40% of its electricity…June 2011 parliament resolved not to replace any reactors, effectively phasing out nuclear power by 2034 Will discuss more specifics for each of these countries on next few slides

Cavendish Fluor partnership to decommission Magnox nuclear sites

• Planned expenditure for Magnox Ltd 2015/16 ~$900 M

• 10 Magnox nuclear power stations and 2 nuclear research sites: – Berkeley, Bradwell, Chapelcross,

Dungeness A, Hinkley Point A, Hunterston A, Oldbury, Sizewell A, Trawsfynydd and Wylfa

– Winfrith and Harwell research sites

10

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Joint venture between Cavendish Nuclear and Fluor selected by UK’s Nuclear Decommissioning Authority in September 2014 Planned spend from NDA draft Business Plan 2015-2018 setting out key objectives and expected progress for all sites over the next three years.

Germany’s nuclear decommissioning • Four nuclear operators—E.ON, RWE,

EnBW, and Sweden’s Vattenfall—estimate nuclear reactor decommissioning will cost $ 1 billion per plant….a recent estimate is $24.2 billion total

• Prefer immediate dismantling route (as opposed to SAFSTOR) and re-use of site (green field)

• Seeks a fleet-wide approach to decommissioning for economies of scale

• Re-started search for high-level waste repository

11

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Estimate from World Nuclear News, Jan 8, 2015

Belgium, Bulgaria and France • 7 Belgium nuclear reactors will be shuttered at

40 y—decommissioning commencing 2014 to 2025

• Bulgaria: EU funds to support decommission Units 1 to 4 of the Kozloduy nuclear power plant; decommissioning will soon commence for Units 1 and 2

• French decommissioning proceeding, need intermediate-level radioactive waste disposal site: – 1 pressurized water reactor (PWR);

300MW – 1 heavy-water reactor (HWR); 70 MW – 6 natural uranium/gas-cooled reactors; 70

to 540 MW – 1 fast-breeder reactor (FBR); 1240 MW

12

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Belgium pledged in 2003 to gradually phase out nuclear power, but has failed to carry out the required overhaul its energy policy…Belgium has seven nuclear reactors generating about half of its electricity, and have limited the operating lives of 40 y, 2014-2025. France: 13 experimental and power reactors are being decommissioned, nine of them first-generation gas-cooled, graphite-moderated types, six being very similar to the UK Magnox type. There are well-developed plans for dismantling these...progress awaits the availability of sites for disposing of the intermediate-level wastes

Will Japan abandon nuclear power? • Japan's nuclear reactors were

taken offline for routine maintenance and testing after the Fukushima acccident

• Utilities retiring older reactors; nuclear plants ~40 years old will undergo decommissioning

• 43 reactors are operable and potentially able to restart (down from 54 reactors before March 2011 Fukushima accident)

• Two-thirds may never return to operation because of 1) high costs, 2) local opposition or 3) seismic risks

13

Presenter

Presentation Notes

In 2013, Japan introduced a regulation that limits operation of nuclear reactors to 40 y

Fukushima Daiichi cleanup: Expensive and time-consuming

Cleanup estimates vary widely • $58B decontamination in Fukushima

prefecture • $100B for radiation cleanup and

compensation to residents – $23B for radiation cleanup of the

territories – $20B to scrap the nuclear plant – $10B for temporary storage of

radioactive soil – $47B for compensation to

residents in the affected area • $100B clean-up over 30 to 40 years • $250B total economic loss

14

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Japan’s National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology, July 2013: Decontamination work in Fukushima prefecture cost up to $58 B Oshima and Yokemoto study, 2014: Estimates $100 B for radiation cleanup and compensation to residents, specifically: $23 B for radiation cleanup of the territories $20 B to scrap the nuclear plant and $10 B for temporary storage of radioactive soil $47 B for compensation to residents in the affected area Guardian, March 2013: Clean-up could cost at least $100 B, on top of compensating evacuees and decontaminating their abandoned homes, and could take 30 to 40 years Japan Center for Economic Research : Estimates of the total economic loss $250 B

Defense projects: Cleaning up our Cold War legacy

• Defense cleanup projects in the U.S. and U.K. and Canada are ramping up – Department of Energy’s cleanup

program has an annual budget nearly $6 billion

– Army Corps of Engineers has a $100 million budget for the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP)

– U.K.’s Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) cleanup at Sellafield, Dounreay and Magnox reactors has planned expenditure for 2015/16 of $5 billion

– Canada established the Nuclear Legacy Liabilities Program (NLLP)

15

16

DOE EM FY 2015 Budget Request

Savannah River $1,282 M

River Protection $1,235 M

Richland $914 M

Oak Ridge $385 M

Idaho $372 M

Paducah $270 M

Los Alamos $225 M

Portsmouth $222 M

Program Direction $281 M

Nevada $65 M

West Valley $60 M

Moab $36 M

Other Sites $26 M

Mission Support $28 M

Total Requested: $5.622 B Funding by Field Site

Presenter

Presentation Notes

For Oak Ridge, Congress enacted $431.2 M (v. President’s request $385M)

ORO EM Longer-Term Cleanup Plans

• Complete transuranic debris processing (~ 2018) • Complete construction of Mercury Treatment Facility (~ 2020) • Complete Cleanup of ETTP (~2022) • Begin demolition of mercury buildings at Y-12 (~ 2023) • Complete U-233 disposition (~ 2024) • Begin operation of new disposal facility (~ 2024) • Complete transuranic sludge processing (~ 2026) • Begin demolition of central campus buildings at ORNL (~ 2027)

17

Presenter

Presentation Notes

From “Community Workshop: Balancing Priorities, Maintaining Momentum” June 24, 2014; Sue Cange, Acting Manger, Oak Ridge Office of Environmental Management

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers FUSRAP • Major FUSRAP sites being remediated

in FY15: – Iowa Army Ammunition Plant, IA – St. Louis Airport Site, Vicinity

Property and Downtown Site, MO

– Maywood Site, NJ – Niagara Falls Storage Site, NY – Shallow Land Disposal Area, PA

• Since the Corps began administering FUSRAP, annual program funding has ranged between $100M to $140 M

18

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Since 1997, when Congress transferred FUSRAP from DOE to USACE, 8 additional sites have been added to FUSRAP.

Management challenges face UK’s Nuclear Decommissioning Authority

• Sellafield Complex – Planned expenditure for 2015/16 ~ $3 B – Commence sludge retrievals from First

Generation Magnox Storage Pond – Demolition of Magnox reprocessing stack

• Dounreay – Planned expenditure for 2015/16 ~ $320 M – Decontamination of Prototype Fast Reactor

pond – Low-level waste vaults now operational

• NDA’s latest estimate of the authority’s

estate is $107 B…$81B due to Sellafield

19

Canadian Nuclear Legacy Liabilities Program • Annual program spend ~$100 M • Chalk River Laboratories (70%)

– 2018 shutdown of medical isotope production research reactor

• Whiteshell Laboratories and nearby Underground Research Laboratory (20%)

• 3 shutdown prototype reactors (10%) – Nuclear Power Demonstration

(NPD) reactor – Douglas Point reactor – Gentilly-1 reactor

20

Presenter

Presentation Notes

The NLLP was initiated in 2006-07 with a five-year, $520 million plan; Canada renewed the NLLP in 2011 with a $439-million three-year second that ended March 31, 2014. The Program is now in its ninth year of implementation, and to date, the Government of Canada has spent $959 million to carry out the NLLP. Completion of the 70-year long-term strategy is estimated to cost about $8 billion. Nuclear energy currently provides around 15% of Canada's total electricity needs

NRC-regulated complex materials sites (Total of ~50 complex materials sites in U.S.)

21

Site Name Location State CriteriaAAR Manufacturing, Inc. Livonia MI LTR-RESAlameda Naval Air Station Alameda CA N/ABeltsville Agricultural Research Laboratory Beltsville MD LTR-UNRESCimarron (Kerr-McGee) Cimarron OK Action-UNRESFMRI (Fansteel), Inc. Muskogee OK LTR-UNRESHunter's Point Naval Shipyard San Francisco CA N/AJefferson Proving Ground Madison IN LTR-RESMallinckrodt Chemical, Inc. St. Louis MO LTR-UNRESMcClellan (former Air Force base) Sacramento CA N/AShallow Land Disposal Area Vandergrift PA LTR-UNRESSigma-Aldrich Maryland Heights MO LTR-UNRESStepan Chemical Company Maywood NJ LTR-UNRESUNC Naval Products New Haven CT LTR-UNRESWest Valley Demonstration Project West Valley NY LTR-UNRESWestinghouse Electric (Hematite Facility) Festus MO LTR-UNRES

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Great resource - STATUS OF THE DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAM—ANNUAL REPORT NRC staff expects FY 2014 activity in the decommissioning program to increase in the area of power reactors while remaining level in others. 50 complex materials sites that are currently undergoing decommissioning in the United States; LTR = License Termination Rule criteria Complex Materials decommissioning: sites with groundwater contamination; sites containing significant soil contamination; sites in which the owners are in bankruptcy; any site where a decommissioning plan is required; all fuel cycle facilities undergoing decommissioning [Each year, the NRC terminates approximately 150 materials licenses. Most of these license terminations are routine, and the sites require little, if any, remediation to meet the NRC’s unrestricted release criteria.]

Some of the complex materials sites regulated by agreement states

22

Site Name Location StateShpack Landfill Norton MATexas Instruments Attleboro MAShieldalloy Metallurgical Corp. Newfield NJCurtiss-Wright Cheswick Cheswick PASafety Light Corp. (SLC) Bloomsburg PASuperbolt (formerly Superior Steel) Carnegie PAWestinghouse Electric (Waltz Mill) Madison PAWhittaker Corp. Greenville PACB&I Federal Services, LLC Knoxville TNWeston Solutions (Kerr-McGee) West Chicago ILAdvanced Medical Systems, Inc. Cleveland OHIsotope Specialties Burbank CAThe Boeing Company Simi Valley CABeta Chem Laboratory Lenexa KSPearland-Manvel Landfill Pearland TX

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Agreement States are regulating the decommissioning of 34 complex materials sites, with technical support from the NRC's regional offices

Research/test reactors, uranium recovery sites and fuel cycle facilities

• 8 research and test reactors undergoing decommissioning, including Ford Nuclear Reactor (Univ. of Michigan), State University of New York at Buffalo, and WPI

• 22 Title II uranium recovery sites currently decommissioning, 11 are regulated by the NRC, and 11 by Agreement States

• Two fuel cycle facilities undergoing partial decommissioning – NFS in Erwin, TN and Honeywell in Metropolis, IL

23

Presenter

Presentation Notes

DOE LM - Title I of UMTRCA designated 22 inactive uranium ore-processing sites for remediation. Remediation of these sites resulted in the creation of 19 disposal cells that contain encapsulated uranium mill tailings and associated contaminated material. Significant decommissioning situation involves legacy uranium sites. GAO report to Congress (May 2014) identified over 40 priority sites on Navajo land, stating that “Congress should consider requiring federal agencies to develop an overall estimate of the remaining scope of work, time frames, and costs to fully address uranium contamination”.

EPA and State-regulated Decommissioning Projects

• NORM/TENORM Affected Industries/Projects – Minerals and mining – Thorium industry (gas mantles, welding rods) – Oil and gas production (pipe scale) – Inappropriate/accidental landfill disposals (containing Ra-226)

• Department of Defense (DoD) cleanup projects

– EPA oversight under CERCLA, working with State regulatory agencies (NRC has limited involvement, stays informed)

– FY15 $315 M to clean up legacy BRAC sites (e.g., McClellan AFB, Alameda NAS, Hunter's Point)

– FY15 $1.1 B for Environmental Restoration at active installations ($896 M) and Formerly Used Defense Sites (FUDS) ($208 M)

24

Decommissioning challenges

• Waste management/disposal

• Clean-up criteria and public acceptance

• Promulgate risk-informed rulemaking for nuclear power plant decommissioning – Risks related to emergency or

security events is reduced for permanently shutdown plants

25

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Where will waste be disposed of? Countries trying to solve this challenge. “Intergenerational equity” – don’t leave our problems to future generations. Clean-up criteria (mention million person study by NCRP) – How clean is clean? NRC’s rules on areas like security and emergency planning are geared to operating plants – so rather than exceptions from operating license, perhaps NRC needs decommissioning-specific rules. That is, NRC regulations for emergency planning (EP) do not distinguish between an operating power reactor and one that is permanently shutdown/defueled. After shutdown, the risks associated with potential accidents is significantly reduced. Historically, exemption requests have been used to seek regulatory relief on a case-by-case basis

Putting it all together… Decommissioning market size

• Global nuclear decommissioning market for nuclear reactors expected to grow at 14.1% to 2018

• European nuclear decommissioning market forecast growth of 43.1% to 2018

• “Global nuclear decommissioning cost seen underestimated, may spiral”; Reuters, Jan. 19, 2015: – IEA predicts 200 reactors will retire by

2040 at estimated cost of $100 billion – Experts believe this figure could easily

double due to underestimates of nuclear plant decommissioning and cost of nuclear waste disposal

26

U.S. Remediation and Environmental Cleanup Services estimated $18.1B in 2014 (IBISWorld)

Presenter

Presentation Notes

U.S. remediation and environmental cleanup market $18.1 billion, with 2% annual growth (IBISWorld December 2014)…may underestimate nuclear decommissioning growth (next update due May 2015) DECON vs. SAFSTOR decision clearly impacts the near-term market growth. For certain, the aging American nuclear infrastructure will likely provide the industry with steady growth over a long period of time – but depending on how many plants move to DECON earlier than 60 years will tell the story on increased industry revenue in the years to 2020, and beyond. �

Decommissioning workforce Where are the jobs? • Federal regulators – principally

NRC, EPA, States • Federal agencies with cleanup

missions – DOE EM, DoD, USACE • Internationally – IAEA,

decommissioning authorities and companies

• Decommissioning Industry – top-tier providers CH2M Hill, CB&I, Bechtel, Fluor, URS, Westinghouse and many 2nd and 3rd tier companies

27

Academic institutions considering curriculum concentrations that address decommissioning disciplines, including skilled trades and crafts.

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Jobs/positions include all the crafts/trades, PMs, HPs, rad engineers, dose modeling, radcon techs, decon techs, D&D workers National Skills Academy for Nuclear in the UK ensures that the UK Nuclear Industry and its Supply Chain has the skilled, competent and safe workforce it needs, including all sub sectors: Defence, Decommissioning, Operations, Waste Management & Disposal and New Nuclear Build. Nuclear Technology Education Consortium coordinated by The University of Manchester in partnership with 10 UK universities provides curriculum that examines and explains the process of decommissioning. For example, Module N04: DECOMMISSIONING, RADIOACTIVE WASTE AND ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT…this module focuses upon the environmental and governance aspects of the decommissioning of civil nuclear facilities and radioactive waste management in the UK. Scores of US decommissioning professionals took their talents to the UK…and now UK SMEs are going to Japan…Sellafield has formal collaboration with TEPCO - opening up a new market for UK SMEs to help with clean-up program at Fukushima. HPS should add “Decommissioning” to list of Employment Specialties

28

Connect the dots Decommissioning is part of the nuclear life cycle…and that’s good for business

• 450 nuclear power plants in the world

• Hundreds to be retired in the next 35 to 40 years

• 100s new nuclear build coming online 10 to 15 y

• Another wave of construction to replace those 450 nuclear plants that are in the

marketplace now

• ALL will have to be decommissioned

• Nothing is certain but death and taxes…and DECOMMISSIONING

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Roderick: “There are about 450 nuclear power plants in the world that are going to have to be retired in the next 35 to 40 years,…we also see several hundred plants coming online in the next 10 to 15 years, and after that we’ll see another wave of construction to replace those 450 nuclear plants that are in the marketplace now. The decommissioning of those will be another market area that we’ll grow.”