U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

32–793 PDF WASHINGTON : 2018

S. HRG. 115–388 

ADVANCED NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY: SAFETY AND 

ASSOCIATED BENEFITS OF LICENSING ACCIDENT TOLERANT FUELS FOR COMMERCIAL NUCLEAR REACTORS 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON 

ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

SEPTEMBER 13, 2018 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Environment and Public Works 

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov 

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS 

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming, Chairman 

JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma 

SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia 

JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas 

ROGER WICKER, Mississippi 

DEB FISCHER, Nebraska 

JERRY MORAN, Kansas 

MIKE ROUNDS, South Dakota 

JONI ERNST, Iowa 

DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska 

RICHARD SHELBY, Alabama 

THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware, 

Ranking Member 

BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland 

BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont 

SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island 

JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon 

KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND, New York 

CORY A. BOOKER, New Jersey 

EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts 

TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois 

CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland 

RICHARD M. RUSSELL, Majority Staff Director 

MARY FRANCES REPKO, Minority Staff Director 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

SEPTEMBER 13, 2018 

OPENING STATEMENTS 

Barrasso, Hon. John, U.S. Senator from the State of Wyoming .......................... 4 

Carper, Hon. Thomas R., U.S. Senator from the State of Delaware ................... 6 

WITNESSES 

Furstenau, Raymond, Director, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, U.S. 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission ......................................................................... 8 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 11 

Responses to additional questions from: 

Senator Barrasso ....................................................................................... 17 

Senator Markey ......................................................................................... 24 

Taylor, Tina, Deputy Chief Nuclear Officer and Senior Director of Research 

and Development, Electric Power Research Institute ....................................... 27 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 29 

Response to an additional question from Senator Barrasso ......................... 36 

Williams, John B., Nuclear Fuels and Analysis Director, Southern Nuclear 

Operating Company ............................................................................................. 37 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 39 

Responses to additional questions from: 

Senator Barrasso ....................................................................................... 44 

Senator Markey ......................................................................................... 45 

Back, Christina A., Ph.D., Vice President, Nuclear Technologies and Materials, General Atomics ......................................................................................... 46 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 48 

Response to an additional question from Senator Barrasso ......................... 53 

Responses to additional questions from Senator Duckworth ........................ 55 

(1) 

ADVANCED NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY: SAFETY 

AND ASSOCIATED BENEFITS OF LICENSING 

ACCIDENT TOLERANT FUELS FOR COMMERCIAL NUCLEAR REACTORS 

THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 13, 2018 

U.S. SENATE, 

COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS, 

Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:03 a.m. in room 

406, Dirksen Senate Building, Hon. John Barrasso (Chairman of 

the Committee) presiding. 

Present: Senators Barrasso, Inhofe, Wicker, Ernst, Carper, 

Cardin, Whitehouse, Gillibrand, and Van Hollen. 

Senator BARRASSO. Good morning. I call this hearing to order. 

Before we begin today’s hearing, I would like to say just a few 

words about America’s Water Infrastructure Act. 

This week we were able to reach a bipartisan agreement with the 

House of Representatives on major water infrastructure legislation. 

America’s Water Infrastructure Act answers President Trump’s call 

to address our Nation’s aging infrastructure. 

In this instance, the bill fixes America’s water infrastructure. It 

authorizes important projects to deepen nationally significant 

ports, upgrades levees and dams, maintains inland waterways and 

shipping lanes, increases water storage for the arid West, fixes 

aging irrigation systems, and enhances American made hydropower. 

This is also the most significant drinking water infrastructure 

bill in decades. It authorizes both new and existing programs that 

will gives States and localities the ability to better address their 

drinking water infrastructure needs. 

This legislation is especially important as Hurricane Florence 

threatens the East Coast. Provisions in this bill will boost flood 

control and increase water storage. Both are critical in the preparation for and response to major storms. 

The House of Representatives plans to pass the legislation today. 

Then the Senate can take it up and send it to President Trump for 

his signature. 

America’s Water Infrastructure Act is a major infrastructure bill. 

It shows congressional commitment to heed the President’s call for 

action on infrastructure. The next step is roads and bridges, surface transportation. I hope we can have the same bipartisan success when we address America’s transportation infrastructure. 

2 

I would like to thank Ranking Member Carper, Subcommittee 

Chairman Inhofe, Subcommittee Ranking Member Cardin, the 

House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman 

Shuster, and Ranking Member DeFazio for all of their hard work 

on this bill. 

At this time, I would like to invite Senator Carper for any additions you would make. 

Senator CARPER. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. 

I want to second the words of praise you have offered for our colleagues in the House, for our colleagues sitting to our left and to 

our right, Senators Cardin, Inhofe, and all of our staff. 

People at home say to me—and I am sure they do in your States 

as well—why can’t you just work together? Why can’t you work together and get something done? One of the most important things 

we can do is create a nurturing environment for job creation and 

job preservation. A big piece of that is infrastructure. A big piece 

of transportation infrastructure is water infrastructure. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your leadership. It has been a 

pleasure to work with you and your staff and our colleagues and 

their staffs in this effort. 

As the Chairman mentioned, on Monday night we were able to 

reach an agreement with our counterparts in the House to advance 

America’s Water Infrastructure Act of 2018, which the Chairman 

and I co-authored, with the invaluable help of both the majority 

and minority staffs of this Committee and our colleagues over the 

better part of this last year. 

As you may recall, our bill was reported out of this Committee 

unanimously 21 to 0 a couple of months ago, and hopefully, it will 

receive the same kind of support in the House later today and then 

in the Senate in short order. 

In the meantime, I would just like to highlight several especially 

noteworthy provisions in this bill that will make significant, positive differences in communities across the country, including many 

in my home State of Delaware, throughout the Delmarva peninsula, and well beyond our borders. 

For the first time in over 20 years this bill reauthorizes the program that provides Federal funding to States to help clean up the 

water our families drink every day. The crisis that unfolded in 

Flint, Michigan, several years ago was both tragic and avoidable. 

We have seen it play out since in far too many States across this 

country. 

In this bill, we are making clear that we have learned our lesson: 

that we need to devote more resources to the things that are most 

important, like making sure every parent—no matter what ZIP 

code they live in—can be confident that the water coming out of 

their tap is safe for their kids and them to drink. 

Not only does this bill reauthorize this program, but we actually 

double its funding by fiscal year 2021 to the tune of nearly $2 billion. Importantly, this legislation also allows States that detect contaminants in drinking water to assist residents who depend on private wells for their drinking water, rather than a public drinking 

water source. 

For example, one in six Delawareans—it is similar in other 

States as well—depend on private wells for their drinking water. 

3 

It is just not right that if contaminants end up in their water, 

through no fault of the citizens or the residents, those residents 

have to find a way to rectify that situation solely on their own. 

That is just not fair. 

Our bill helps to change that by helping States test and treat underground sources of drinking water. Also of note, this bill authorizes investments in the waterways that keep this country moving, 

from the Ports of Wilmington to the Port of Mobile to the Port of 

New York and the Port of New Jersey. 

Over 99 percent of U.S. overseas trade volume moves through 

waterways that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers maintains. 

Think of that; 99 percent. Our bill will help to improve and expand 

the harbors, channels, and ports on which our economy depends. 

With Hurricane Florence bearing down on the East Coast this 

week, I would be remiss if I did not briefly mention the important 

provisions in this bill that help coastal communities better prepare 

for increasingly powerful and frequently extreme weather events 

and enable those communities to rebuild more quickly after disaster strikes. 

Most notably perhaps, in light of the avoidable devastation and 

tragedy we saw in the wake of Hurricanes Maria and Harvey, our 

bill allows for the investment of $100 million in repairing drinking 

water systems damaged by storms. It creates new programs to protect this critical part of our infrastructure from damage due to extreme weather events going forward. 

While President Trump has made waves this week with his comments about his ‘‘unsung successes’’ in Puerto Rico where nearly 

3,000 of our fellow Americans apparently lost their lives, we have 

been working hard to pass a bill that will help to ensure storm ravaged communities actually have the resources they so desperately 

need. 

There is much more in this bill that is worth highlighting, and 

I am sure there will be time to do so in the days and weeks to 

come. 

For now, I want to again thank our Chairman. I want to thank 

our colleagues, Senators Inhofe, Cardin and their staffs for their 

hard work throughout this process. 

I also want to thank our friends in the House, Representatives 

Shuster, DeFazio, Walden, and Pallone, who were great partners in 

the House. 

Together, we are stronger. When we are together, so is America 

stronger. 

Last, I want to thank Secretary R.D. James, who sat right here 

where you sit, Ms. Taylor, several months ago for his confirmation 

hearing to be the Assistant Secretary to head the Army Corps of 

Engineers, who made this legislation a real priority and worked 

with the Senators on this Committee to craft a bill that I think we 

can all be proud of. 

I will end with an African proverb that I think is particularly relevant here: ‘‘If you want to go fast, go alone. If you want to go far, 

go together.’’ 

I think the fact that we have gotten a bill as substantive as this 

one to this point is proof that, in this Congress, if you want to get 

4 

meaningful work done, you have to find some common ground and 

find ways to work together. Kudos to everyone. 

As we say in the Navy, when something good is happening, 

‘‘Bravo, Zulu.’’ 

Thank you. 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you so much, Senator Carper, for all 

your cooperation. As you say, 21 to 0 in this Committee. 

Senator Inhofe, as Chairman of the Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee, is there anything you would like to add? 

Senator INHOFE. No, I don’t think so, but one of the best kept secrets in America is that Oklahoma is navigable. The NCARNS, we 

have that reauthorization assured even though we have fallen behind. A lot of good things have not been mentioned that are a part 

of this. 

Senator BARRASSO. Senator Cardin. 

Senator CARDIN. I just really want to add that under Senator 

Barrasso’s and Senator Carper’s leadership, our Committee worked 

very constructively on this. Under Senator Inhofe, as Chair and 

Ranking Member, that was tradition in regards to the WRDA bill 

and was continued. I just wanted to acknowledge that. 

I also want to point out, Mr. Chairman, as I was walking over 

here, I was stopped by the National League of Cities. They wanted 

to lobby me on one issue, the passage of the WRDA bill. I gave a 

copy of the letter to Senator Carper. 

I also want to acknowledge Secretary James, when he was here, 

made commitments to visit some of our major facilities. He went 

to Poplar Island with me. His engagement on this process was extremely valuable. 

This bill—the Water Resources Development Act—is going to be 

important for our country. It is important in Maryland on the 

Chesapeake Bay and our efforts to clean up the Chesapeake Bay. 

It is important to Maryland for safe drinking water. 

The work that is done here is important to help our schools and 

public facilities with the vast connections with regard to pipes that 

will no longer contain lead. It is important for our economy and 

what it does in regard to the Port of Baltimore, and by the way, 

other ports around the country and around Maryland. 

I am very proud to be a part of this, and congratulations to all. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BARRASSO, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF WYOMING 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you to all of you. 

This morning we are here to examine the safety and other benefits associated with advanced nuclear fuels, known as accident tolerant fuels, ATF. Accident tolerant fuels are for commercial and 

nuclear power plants. These fuels have the potential to greatly increase the safety and performance in nuclear reactors. 

When loaded into a reactor, this technology would further protect 

uranium from melting if a plant loses the ability to cool the fuel. 

In the event of an emergency, accident tolerant fuels would provide 

significantly more time for power plant operators to prevent the release of radioactive material. 

Following the 2011 disaster in Fukushima, Japan, Congress established a research program at the Department of Energy to enVerDate Aug 31 2005 06:39 Nov 21, 2018 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\_EPW\DOCS\32793.TXT SONYA
5 

courage the development of accident tolerant fuels. Seven years 

later we are approaching the critical window for nuclear power 

plants to reap the safety benefits of this technology. 

In addition to safety benefits, accident tolerant fuels may also 

provide meaningful economic benefits. For example, these fuels 

would allow nuclear power plants to generate electricity more efficiently. 

In doing so, the plants would reduce costs and generate less nuclear waste. To realize these benefits, these fuels must be developed, tested, licensed, and deployed commercially. The Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission plays the principle role in this process. 

The NRC has the exclusive authority to license and regulate the 

civilian use of nuclear materials. Approving new nuclear fuels can 

be a challenge. The fuel vendors must first test the fuel in rigorous 

experiments. The NRC then must validate the results of these tests 

through highly complex computer modeling. 

Finally, the NRC must ultimately license the new fuels for use 

in a power plant. The NRC, the Department of Energy, and the nuclear industry are all carefully considering ways to facilitate this 

work. 

In April of this year the NRC Commissioners held their first public briefing on what needs to get done prior to licensing these accident tolerant fuels. The briefing helped the agency staff to develop 

a project plan for regulating accident tolerant fuels, which the staff 

issued earlier this month. Yesterday the NRC staff held a public 

meeting on the plan. 

The private sector is also taking steps to deploy accident tolerant 

fuels on an aggressive schedule. Two fuel vendors have already 

loaded test materials into two reactors to gather critical data. This 

process is encouraging, though significant hurdles remain. 

One of the hurdles is the permanent closure of the Halden Test 

Center, which Norway announced earlier this summer. Since 1958 

the Halden Reactor provided critical information on nuclear fuels 

and materials to organizations within 19 countries, including the 

NRC, the Department of Energy, and the American fuel vendors. 

The Halden Reactor would have provided key scientific data to 

assess the performance of accident tolerant fuels. The NRC, the Department of Energy, and the nuclear fuel vendors will now need to 

adjust their existing research plans. In spite of Halden’s closure, it 

is imperative that the NRC and the private sector stay on schedule 

to make an accident tolerant fuel available commercially as soon as 

possible. 

The operating licenses for over a third of our Nation’s nuclear 

power plants will expire between 2025 and 2035. If accident tolerant fuels are available, American energy utilities will be able to 

reap their safety and economic benefits. 

Such benefits may encourage utilities to make multiple, multimillion dollar investment decisions to extend the licenses for these 

nuclear power plants. These new technologies would also help keep 

Americans employed. That includes workers in my home State of 

Wyoming, which produces more uranium than any other State in 

the country. 

Preserving America’s nuclear fleet is not only good for the economy, but is also good for the environment. Nuclear power provides 

6 

a source of clean energy to millions of American families and businesses. 

As this week’s issue of The Economist explains, ‘‘Some environmental activists don’t like this source of zero carbon energy, but 

nuclear power still provides more than twice as much electricity 

globally as wind and 5.5 times as much as solar.’’ 

I look forward to the discussions this morning. 

I will now turn to Ranking Member Carper for an opening statement. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. THOMAS R. CARPER, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF DELAWARE 

Senator CARPER. I want to apologize to our witnesses. Normally, 

we call this a hearing, and that is for us to hear from you. Please 

bear with us as you hear from us for just a few more minutes, and 

then we will put on our listening ears. 

Again, Mr. Chairman, thanks so much for convening this important hearing on advanced nuclear technologies, specifically accident 

tolerant fuels. I spent a lot of years in my life in the Navy and 

have a huge appreciation for nuclear on ships and submarines. 

We were scheduled to have the christening of the USS Delaware, a fast attack, junior class nuclear submarine in Newport News this 

Saturday. It has been postponed until October for obvious reasons. 

I am one who fully realizes and understands the importance of nuclear energy done well and done safely. 

I know my colleagues have heard me say this before, but I will 

say it again: I believe there are few environmental challenges more 

serious than climate change and the extreme weather associated 

with it. 

Our leading scientific agencies, NOAA and NASA among them, 

tell us that climate change is causing rising global temperatures, 

rising sea levels, and extreme weather events. We witness them almost every month, sometimes every week. Weather events, like the 

massive Hurricane Florence, is expected to strike the East Coast 

in the next few days and threaten the lives and well being of millions of Americans. 

NOAA also tells us that extreme weather events that have cost 

our country more than $1 billion apiece have doubled in frequency 

over the past decade, with $425 billion in losses occurring over the 

last 5 years. That is $425 billion with a B. Think about that. 

Whether it is a drought, a forest fire in the West, a hurricane 

or a massive flood in the East, climate change results in lost income, damaged properties, and sadly, in some cases, lost lives. 

As we send up prayers for those who live in Florence’s path and 

who are preparing for this massive storm, our Federal Government 

has a moral responsibility, not only to help our communities be better prepared for climate fueled events, but to also address the root 

causes of these events. 

To some of our friends across the aisle who are not yet ready to 

join the rest of us in addressing climate action, let me note that 

nuclear power is one of the many examples of how our Nation can 

combat climate change, and at the same time, grow our economy. 

I want to say that again. Let me note that nuclear power is one 

of the many examples of how our Nation can combat climate 

7 

change, and at the same time, grow our economy. We can do both, 

and we must. 

When nuclear power is produced responsibly, it does not emit 

carbon and reduces our reliance on fossil fuels. Our country can— 

and should—seize the opportunity to continue to use nuclear energy in our national energy mix. 

Today, nuclear power provides about 20 percent of our Nation’s 

energy, as well as 60 percent of our carbon-free electricity, but as 

we know, the nuclear industry still faces many challenges. We need 

to make sure reactors operate well and safely, especially in the 

event of extreme weather. 

Take what happened in Fukushima: nuclear power can lead to 

devastating circumstances if the proper safety precautions are not 

in place, not up to date, or not adhered to. Safety must always be 

the top priority in our country’s approach to improving nuclear energy. 

Today’s costs for safety precautions at existing reactors, along 

with the costs of construction, operation, and maintenance, can be 

expensive, especially when compared to the cost of other sources of 

energy, such as natural gas. 

Fortunately, recent advancements in science allow us to build 

and operate advanced nuclear technology that is safer, cleaner, and 

cheaper. If we are smart, we will replace our aging nuclear reactors 

with this new technology. 

As we will hear today, advanced nuclear technology could improve the safety and efficiency of our existing reactors over the 

next 5 years. Using new materials for our nuclear fuel rods in our 

existing reactors, known as accident tolerant fuel, may allow our 

existing reactors to avoid the danger of overheating during emergency situations, which is what happened at Fukushima. 

At the same time, accident tolerant fuel could enable our current 

fleet of nuclear reactors to run more efficiently, and therefore, be 

more cost competitive. This is situation in which it is possible to 

do well and do good at the same time. 

My colleagues know that I love win-win situations. They do, too. 

Accident tolerant fuel has the potential to be a great win, not only 

for the fight against climate change and severe weather, but for industry, American jobs, and most importantly, the safety of the 

American people. We might want to think of this as a win-win-winwin situation. 

As companies make advances in technology, we need to make 

sure that our regulatory framework keeps pace. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NRC, is still considered the world’s gold standard of nuclear regulatory agencies. 

As science and technology evolve, so too must the NRC. However, 

as I said before, we cannot afford to cut corners when it comes to 

nuclear safety. I am interested—and I think we are interested—in 

hearing today how the Federal Government can ensure all the design testing needed is completed expeditiously to help inform the 

NRC licensing process. 

We also need to make sure that the NRC has the resources it 

needs to review these new technologies and to ensure that our current nuclear reactor fleet remains safe. 

8 

In closing, let me add that I strongly believe Congress has a critical role to play in ensuring that our Nation invests wisely in clean 

energy. That includes finding ways to support advanced nuclear 

technologies, which allow our reactors to be safer, more resilient, 

and more efficient. 

Advances in nuclear energy can help us attain a more nurturing 

environment for job creation along with cleaner air for our people 

and planet. That is a pretty good combination, one which most 

Americans would like to see us embrace, and I hope we will do just 

that. 

Thank you so much. 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you, Senator Carper. 

Senator INHOFE. Mr. Chairman, let me just make one comment. 

We have been fighting this battle for a long time now. We know 

how long it takes new technology to move. When you look at countries like France and China, we have to figure out a way to do it 

faster. It is obviously an answer that we need to exploit. 

Regretfully, we have all this competition for committees this 

morning, and I will not be able to stay, but to me, there is no single 

issue that is more important than this, further exploiting the opportunity to come up with the clean energy that is offered through 

our nuclear efforts. 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you, Senator Inhofe. 

Thank you and welcome to all of our witnesses. We are delighted 

that you have joined us here today. 

Today, we are joined by Raymond Furstenau, Director, Office of 

Nuclear Regulatory Research, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission; Tina Taylor, Deputy Chief Nuclear Officer and Senior Director of Research and Development, Electric Power Research Institute; John B. Williams, Nuclear Fuels and Analysis Director, 

Southern Nuclear Company; and Dr. Christina A. Back, Ph.D., Vice 

President, Nuclear Technologies and Materials, General Atomics. 

I want to welcome all of you. I want to remind you that your full 

written testimony will be submitted for the official record. If you 

could, please keep your statements to 5 minutes so that we have 

time for questions. 

I look forward to hearing your testimony if we could start with 

you, Mr. Furstenau. 

STATEMENT OF RAYMOND FURSTENAU, DIRECTOR, OFFICE 

OF NUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCH, U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 

Mr. FURSTENAU. Good morning, Chairman Barrasso, Ranking 

Member Carper, and distinguished members of the Committee. 

My name is Raymond Furstenau. I serve as Director of Nuclear 

Regulatory Research at the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

I am pleased to be here today to report to you on the status of our 

preparations to license the safe use of accident tolerant fuels. 

I would like to start this morning by highlighting the NRC’s commitment to enhancing our regulatory infrastructure to facilitate the 

safe use of new technologies. 

A recent example of success in this area is the licensing of new 

facilities using novel technologies for the production of medical isotopes, an issue of national interest due to periodic shortages of maVerDate Aug 31 2005 06:39 Nov 21, 2018 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\_EPW\DOCS\32793.TXT SONYA
9 

terial used in diagnostic medical procedures for millions of Americans each year. 

Accident tolerant fuel, or ATF, is another area of new technology, 

which has the potential to enhance safety at U.S. nuclear power 

plants. ATF is a category of new fuels for nuclear reactors that are 

expected to perform better than currently licensed fuels under 

transient and accident conditions. 

The fuel in use today at U.S. nuclear reactors is comprised of 

uranium dioxide pellets, encased in a metallic cladding fabricated 

from a zirconium based alloy, and has remained largely the same 

over the past several decades. 

This is a plastic mock up of a fuel rod. This is a little bit larger 

in diameter than an actual fuel rod. Inside the rod, the cladding 

is zirconium based. The uranium dioxide pellets are stacked in the 

fuel rods. In an actual reactor, active fuel is about 12 feet in 

length. There are hundreds of elements in a fuel assembly and 

about tens of thousands of these individual rods put into assemblies in a nuclear reactor. 

We expect that near-term ATF designs, defined as the concepts 

that industry is pursuing for deployment by the mid-2020s, will 

have relatively small departures from today’s nuclear fuel designs. 

These small departures include specially designed additives to 

standard fuel pellets and robust coatings applied to the outside diameter of standard claddings intended to reduce corrosion, increase 

wear resistance, and reduce the production of hydrogen under high 

temperature, accident, conditions. 

Nuclear fuel designs with an iron based alloy cladding, also offering improved corrosion resistance, will likely be submitted for NRC 

review shortly following these near-term designs. 

In the longer term, we expect ATF concepts to be submitted for 

NRC review that utilize new fuel pellet materials that operate at 

lower temperatures than current uranium dioxide fuel pellets, and 

ceramic silicon carbide cladding, which potentially offers significantly improved performance under high temperature conditions. 

We also expect solid metallic fuel ATF concepts, which offer 

lower operating temperatures and decreased consequences of cladding breaches, to be submitted for NRC review in the years ahead. 

To varying degrees, each of these ATF designs is expected to 

offer power plant operators more flexibility in how they operate 

their plants and provide more robust performance during normal 

operations and under potential accident conditions. 

Most notably, ATF designs may enhance the ability to mitigate 

accidents due to the additional time available to plant operators 

prior to the onset of potential fuel damaging conditions. ATF designs may also have the ability to reduce the amount of high level 

waste produced by operating reactors by permitting extended operation of fuel assemblies in the reactor core. 

While the NRC can license these new fuels under the current 

regulatory structure, we are taking steps to make our processes 

more efficient and effective. To that end, the NRC has developed 

a project plan to prepare for both near-term and longer-term ATF 

designs. The plan addresses the complete fuel cycle, including fuel 

fabrication, fresh fuel transport in reactor requirements, and spent 

fuel storage and transportation. 

10 

Throughout development of the plan, we have had extensive engagement with our stakeholders including licensees, nuclear vendors, industry groups, non-governmental organizations, and our 

international counterparts. Some of those stakeholders are on the 

panel today. 

The plan outlines a new regulatory approach to fuel licensing, in 

which the NRC is seeking engagement with potential ATF applicants much earlier in the research and development phase than it 

has in the past. 

This early engagement is designed to identify potential safety 

issues as early as possible so they can be addressed and the overall 

safety conclusions can be reached within the planned licensing 

timeline. 

Throughout our preparations, we are monitoring the Department 

of Energy’s efforts to advance the technical basis of ATF, both experimentally and computationally. This close coordination is allowing the NRC and DOE to make progress despite the closure of an 

internationally funded nuclear fuel and materials research facility, 

the Halden Reactor in Norway. 

The NRC and DOE staffs are also working on ways to leverage 

DOE’s testing capabilities and computational tools for use in reaching our safety findings for ATF designs without compromising the 

agency’s regulatory independence. 

In conclusion, with the issuance of the staff’s ATF project plan 

and the heightened engagement of nuclear fuel vendors, DOE, and 

licensees, I believe the NRC has positioned itself well to efficiently 

license the safe use of ATF. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Furstenau follows:] 

11 


32793.001

Raymond Furstenau 

Director 

Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

Raymond Furstenau began serving as the Director, Office of 

Nuclear Regulatory Research (RES) on July 3, 2018. Prior to 

joining the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Mr. Furstenau held 

several technical and leadership positions in the U.S. 

Department of Energy (DOE) from 1987 to 2018. During most of 

those 30+ years, he provided Federal oversight of nuclear 

facility operations and nuclear energy research & development programs at the Idaho 

National Laboratory. Mr. Furstenau transferred from DOE's Idaho Operations Office to 

Washington, DC in 2015 and served as Associate Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary 

in DOE's Office of Nuclear Energy. 

Mr. Furstenau holds a B.S. degree in Applied Science and Engineering from the U.S. 

Military Academy and served as an active duty and reserve Army officer. He also 

received a M.S. degree in Nuclear Science and Engineering from Idaho State University 

and is a registered professional nuclear engineer. 
12 


32793.002

WRITTEN STATEMENT 

BY RAYMOND FURSTENAU, DIRECTOR OF NUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCH 

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 

TO THE 

SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS 

SEPTEMBER 13, 2018 

Good morning, Chairman Barrasso, Ranking Member Carper, and distinguished members of 

the Committee. My name is Raymond Furstenau, and I serve as Director of Nuclear Regulatory 

Research at the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). I am pleased to report to you on 

the status of our preparations to license the safe use of accident tolerant fuel. 

The NRC is an independent Federal agency established to regulate commercial nuclear power 

plants; research, test, and training reactors; nuclear fuel cycle facilities; and radioactive 

materials used in medicine, in academia, and for industrial purposes. I would like to start by 

highlighting the NRC's commitment to enhancing our regulatory infrastructure to facilitate the 

safe use of new technologies. An example of success in this area is the recent licensing of new 

facilities using novel technologies for the production of medical isotopes, an issue of national 

interest due to periodic shortages of material used in diagnostic medical procedures for millions 

of Americans every year. 

Accident Tolerant Fuel, or ATF, is another area of new technology, which has the potential to 

enhance safety at U.S. nuclear power plants. ATF is a category of new fuels for nuclear 

reactors that are expected to perform better than currently licensed fuels under transient and 

accident scenarios. The fuel in use today at U.S. nuclear reactors is comprised of uranium 

dioxide fuel pellets, encased in a metallic cladding fabricated from a zirconium-based alloy, and 

has remained largely the same over the past several decades. We expect that near-term ATF 

designs, which are the concepts that industry is pursuing for deployment by the mid-2020s, will 
13 


32793.003

have relatively small departures from today's nuclear fuel designs. These departures include 

specially designed additives to standard fuel pellets and robust coatings applied to the outside 

diameter of standard claddings intended to reduce corrosion, increase wear resistance, and 

reduce the production of hydrogen under high temperature (accident) conditions. Nuclear fuel 

designs with an iron-based alloy cladding, also offering improved corrosion resistance, will likely 

be submitted for NRC review shortly following these near-term designs. 

In the longer term, we expect ATF concepts to be submitted for NRC review that utilize new fuel 

pellet materials that operate at lower temperatures than current uranium dioxide fuel pellets, and 

ceramic silicon carbide cladding, which offers significantly improved performance under high 

temperature conditions. We also expect solid-metallic fuel ATF concepts, which offer lower 

operating temperatures and decreased consequences of cladding breaches, to be submitted for 

NRC review in the years ahead. 

To varying degrees, each of these ATF designs is expected to offer power plant operators more 

flexibility in how they operate their plants and provide more robust performance during normal 

operations and under potential accident conditions. Most notably, ATF designs will enhance the 

ability to mitigate accidents due to the additional time available to plant operators prior to the 

onset of potential fuel-damaging conditions. ATF designs also have the ability to reduce the 

amount of high-level waste produced by operating reactors by permitting extended operation of 

fuel assemblies in the reactor core. 

While the NRC can license these new fuels under the current regulatory structure, we are taking 

steps to make our processes more efficient and effective. To that end, the NRC has developed 

a project plan to prepare for both near-term and longer-term ATF designs. We began the 

development of this project plan within the current regulatory framework in order to optimize 

2 
14 


32793.004

timing and resources and with the confidence that our regulations provide the appropriate 

starting point and flexibility to accommodate accident tolerant fuel designs. We believe the 

existing regulatory framework is largely compatible with the current near-term accident tolerant 

fuel concepts. For example, Southern Nuclear's Hatch reactor in Georgia has recently loaded a 

limited number of testing samples of a near-term ATF design under its current operating license 

and the NRC's existing regulatory framework. Consistent with our Principles of Good 

Regulation and based on our interactions with Southern Nuclear throughout that process, the 

NRC has decided to more clearly document our regulatory positions on this practice to offer 

enhanced regulatory stability as industry seeks to obtain operating experience with A TF 

designs. The industry has safely used these types of targeted programs for decades, and the 

NRC recognizes that fuel performance data collected in commercial reactors through this testing 

plays an important role in making the safety case for new fuel designs. 

The NRC's ATF project plan addresses the complete fuel cycle, including consideration of fuel 

fabrication, fresh fuel transport, in-reactor requirements, and spent fuel storage and 

transportation. The plan also includes an acknowledgement of the consideration for operational 

flexibilities that licensees may seek based upon the additional safety margin provided by A TF 

designs. Throughout the development of the plan, we have had extensive engagement with our 

stakeholders, including licensees, nuclear fuel vendors, industry groups, non-governmental 

organizations, and our international counterparts. 

The plan outlines a new regulatory approach to fuel licensing, in which the NRC is seeking 

engagement with potential ATF applicants much earlier in the research and development phase 

than it has in the past. This early engagement is designed to identify potential safety issues as 

early as possible so they can be addressed and the overall safety conclusions can be reached 

within the planned licensing timeline. Data sharing and engagement during the research and 

3 
15 


32793.005

development phase facilitates efficiency in the later licensing phase. The NRC will also be 

refining its regulatory infrastructure, informed by significant communication with our 

stakeholders such that transparency is maintained and regulatory expectations are clearly 

communicated to the applicant as early as possible in the process. 

Throughout our preparations, we are monitoring the Department of Energy's (DOE's) efforts to 

advance the technical basis for ATF, both experimentally and computationally. We have added 

A TF-specific addenda to our memorandum of understanding with the DOE, which allows us to 

engage with the department on planned testing of accident tolerant fuel designs under normal 

operations and accident conditions, as well as efforts to develop and validate the appropriate 

data required to model accident tolerant fuel. This close coordination is allowing the NRC and 

DOE to make progress despite the closure of an internationally funded nuclear fuel and 

materials research facility, the Halden Reactor in Norway. Additionally, the NRC staff is closely 

following a DOE-led effort to assess and make recommendations for irradiation testing for ATF 

at alternate facilities such that the timeline for A TF deployment is not impacted. 

The NRC and DOE staffs are also working on ways to leverage DOE's computational tools for 

use in reaching our safety findings for ATF designs. Based on the information we have so far, 

we believe that for near-term ATF concepts, it will be most efficient and effective for staff to use 

existing NRC computational tools, which can be modified with minimal effort and for which the 

staff have extensive experience and confidence. For longer-term concepts, which require 

greater effort to adapt existing NRC computational tools, DOE's unique and advanced modeling 

capabilities are being evaluated for NRC use. 

4 
16 


32793.006

In conclusion, with the issuance of the staffs A TF project plan and the heightened engagement 

with nuclear fuel vendors, DOE, and licensees, I believe the agency has positioned itself well to 

license the safe use of A TF in an efficient manner. 

5 
17 


32793.007

Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works 

Hearing entitled, "Advanced Nuclear Technology: Safety and Associated Benefits of 

Licensing Accident Tolerant Fuels for Commercial Nuclear Reactors" 

September 13, 2018 

Questions for the Record for Mr. Furstenau 

Chairman Barrasso: 

QUESTION 1. Last year, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) established a 

steering committee to develop a strategy to license and deploy 

accident tolerant fuels (ATF). 

a) Please list all the offices and each office's representative involved 

with the ATF steering committee (ATF SC). 

b) Please define the respective roles of those offices. 

c) Who leads the steering committee? 

d) How will the leader of the steering committee manage and 

coordinate with staff in other NRC offices? 

ANSWER. 

a, b, c) The !able below lists !he office and division representation on the NRC's ATF SC and 

the respective role of each member. The ATF SC is led by the Director of the Division of 

Safety Systems in the Offir,e of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, currently Dr. Mirela 

Gavrilas, It should be noted that membership of the ATF SC is defined by position, 

Division Director or Deputy Division Director of each Division listed on the table, and 

does not follow specific individuals. 
18 


32793.008

Office of 

Nuclear 

Reactor 

Regulation 

Nuclear 

Regulatory 

Office of 

Nuclear 

Material Safety 

and Safeguards 

Office of New 

Reactors 

Division of Risk Assessment 

Division of Operating Reactor 

Licensing 

Division of Licensing Projects 

Division of Systems Analysis 

Safeguards and Environmental 

Review 

Division of Spent Fuel 

Management 

Division of Safety Systems, Risk 

Assessment and Advanced 

Reactors 

Manages the review 

processing of topical reports 

related to ATF. 

M<m<I9€'S the response to 

research needs for ATF and 

maintains fuel and accident 

transportation and storage of 

nuclear fuel. 

impacts on new reactors, insights 

from preparations to license 

advanced reactors, and risk 

d) The leader, or chair, of the ATF SC manages and coordinates with staff in other NRC 

offices through the SC to ensure progress and implementation of the NRC's ATF Project 

2 
19 


32793.009

Plan to prepare for efficient and effective licensing of A TF. 1 Steering Committee 

meetings are generally held on a monthly basis, or more frequently based on current 

events, to discuss the status of ATF working group activities and A TF activities external 

to the NRC, such as those of industry and the U.S. Department of Energy. The project 

plan is a living document that may evolve as (1) ATF concepts are more clearly defined, 

(2) schedules are refined, {3) the knowledge level of specific concepts increases as 

experimental testing programs are completed, and {4) potential extensions to the current 

operating envelope of fuel are identified. As the ATF SC begins to implement the ATF 

Project Plan, the team will be re-assessing the roles and responsibilities of the sc to 

ensure it continues to provide a structure for success. 

QUESTION 2. The NRC Commissioners are currently reviewing staff 

recommendations on what is known as the "NRC Transformation 

Initiative." To what extent does the NRC's ATF project plan 

incorporate staff recommendations into the Transformation 

Initiative? 

ANSWER 

The NRC Executive Director for Operation's report to the Commission on the transformation 

initiative stated that the agency's ongoing initiatives related to ATF, "in combination with the 

approaches in the staffs recommended licensing strategy to appropriately focus on more safety 

significant issues and use existing information, will ensure that the NRC is prepared to review 

1 The ATF Project Plain is available in the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management 

system (ADAMS) at Accession No. ML 18261A412. 

3 
20 


32793.010

applications for the use of ATF in a timeframe that suppo1ts the industry's current timelines for 

development of the fuel."2 

In reaching this conclusion, the team that developed the report recognized that the NRC's ATF 

project plan outlines a new paradigm for fuel licensing that allows for the steps of the fuel 

development and licensing process to be completed in parallel, as opposed to in series, as has 

been done in the past. This approach has the potential to enable si9nificant schedule efficiency 

for the time between the completion of the technical basis to support a safety finding and the 

licensing of the fuel for use at U.S. nuclear power plants. The plan was developed through 

extensive internal and external stakeholder interaction to ensure that best practices from within 

the agency and the nuclear industry as a whole were taken into account 

QUESTION3. The NRC is simultaneously reviewing multiple new fuel types and 

reactor designs. 

a) How is the Commission using "risk-informed analyses" to outline 

its safety priorities during the licensing process and make clear to 

applicants what information is required? 

b) What steps is the NRC taking to ensure the process is clear and 

expeditious, while balancing safety interests? 

ANSWER 

a) The NRC uses a risk"informed approach to regulation by taking into account both the 

probability of an event and its possible consequences to understand its importance 

(risk). To estimate risk, the NRC uses probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) methods in 

2 Enclosure 1 of SECY"18"0060 "Achieving Modem Risk-Informed Regulation" (ADAMS Accession No. 

Ml18110A186), 

4 
21 


32793.011

regulatory matters to the extent supported by the state-of-the-art in PRA technology and 

data. PRA methods complement the NRC's deterministic approach (based on 

experience, test results, and expert judgment) and support the NRC's traditional 

defense-in-depth philosophy, consistent with the Commission's policy statement3 on the 

use of PRA in nuclear regulatory activities. 

To ensure applicants understand what information is necessary to meet regulatory 

requirements, the NRC staff seeks to issue guidance in all practical areas. Where 

applicable, publicly available guidance documents outline how the NRC staff uses riskinformed analyses to inform its actions. One example of a significant guidance 

document that does so is NUREG-0800, "Standard Review Plan for the Review of Safety 

Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants: LWR Edition" (available at 

bttos:fi)AM''fJ.mc.gov/readin_g-rm/doc-co!leciions/nuregs/staff/sr0800/l. As noted in the 

introduction to NUREG-0800, the staff may adjust the depth of review for a particular 

topic based on risk insights, among other considerations. In addition, the Office of New 

Reactors has applied a safety-focused review approach to the design certification review 

for the NRC's first application for a small modular reactor (NuScale), in order to better 

balance the level of staff review with the associated safety significance. 

To communicate to the public at large how risk information is used in a variety of 

regulatory applications, the NRC maintains information an risk-informed activities in the 

reactor, materials, and waste areas on its public web site. In addition, the NRC holds 

periodic Risk-Informed Steering Committee public meetings with industry 

3 60 FR 42622 "Use of Probabilistic Risk Assessment Methods in Nuclear Regulatory Activities; Final 

Policy Statemeni" (https:l/www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collectionslcommission/policy/60fr-42622.pdf) 

5 
22 


32793.012

representatives and other stakeholders to discuss the status and priority of risk-informed 

initiatives and processes. 

b) The NRC's Principles of Good Regulaiion (available at https:l/www.nrc.gov/aboutnrc/values.html) guide the staff in carrying out our regulatory activities. These principles 

focus the staff on ensuring safety and security while appropriately balancing the interests 

of the NRC's stakeholders, including the public and licensees. Our principles include 

independence, openness, efficiency, clarity, and reliability. 

In accordance with the Principles of Good Regulation, the staff has developed and 

issued the NRC's ATF Project Plan to prepare for efficient and effective S<lfety reviews 

and licensing decisions for ATF. The plan lays out a new paradigm for fuel licensing that 

has the potential to enable significant schedule efficiency. It also includes several 

additional deliverables for the NRC staff, including phenomena identification and ranking 

table (PIRT) exercises, and development of concept-specific licensing roadmaps, which 

will enhance clarity for licensees and applicants as the technical basis and development 

timeline for each ATF concept continues to progress. Early alignment between the NRC 

staff and stakeholders on the phenomena important to safety for each ATF design will 

ensure that applicants understand the testing needs and justifications necessary to allow 

the NRC to reach a safety finding. The additional deliverables will also require public 

interactions to allow interested parties to provide feedback to the staff in all areas, 

including clarity. efficiency, and safety. Following the PIRT exercise for each ATF 

concept, the staff will develop concept-specific licensing roadmaps that outline, for each 

individual concept, a pathway for meeting the regulatory requirements necessary for 

licensing. 

6 
23 


32793.013

The development ofthe A TF Project Plan has been transparent The plan was issued 

for public comment in the Federal Register, the NRC held four public meetings on the 

plan over the past year, and staff briefed the Commission and the NRC's Advisory 

Committee on Reactor Safeguard's Subcommittee on Metallurgy and Reactor Fuels on 

draft versions of the plan. This has provided stakeholders with opportunities to provide 

feedback to the staff on ATF activities. 

Also, with regard to the development of ATF, based on stakeholder feedback, the NRC 

staff is developing guidance to clarify when lead test assembly (L T A) programs require 

NRC staff review and approval prior to utilization in the reactor core. This draft guidance 

was published for public comment in June 2018 and is scheduled to be finalized in early 

2019. 

QUESTION 4. 

ANSWER. 

How is the NRC collaborating with the Department of Energy (DOE) 

in modeling and simulating new fuel and reactor designs? 

Over the past several years, the NRC staff has been working with the DOE to determine how 

best to leverage DOE's Consortium for Advanced Simulation of Light Water Reactors (CASL) 

and Nuclear Energy Advanced Modeling and Simulation programs for new fuel and reactor 

designs. With respect to CASLin particular, there are several areas where the DOE's modeling 

and simulation have been used to improve the NRC's confirmatory tools for safety and licensing 

reviews. The majority of the effort between the two programs has been in the areas of 

neutronics and nuclear data. For example, the Shift CASL code, which calculates radiation 

transport. is being integrated into the NRC-funded SCALE code to improve NRC's capability in 

7 
24 


32793.014

reference depletion calculations, criticality safety, and shielding analysis, The integration is 

expected to be completed by January 2019 and will improve calculations of reactor pressure 

vessel neutron fluences, which are used to estimate the neutron embrittlement of the reactor 

pressure vessel, a critical part of NRC's evaluation of proposed plant lifetime extensions, 

More recently, on September 12, 2018, NRC staff met with DOE and representatives of the 

CASL program to continue collaborative efforts in evaluating DOE computer code capabilities 

for potential regulatory applications, NRC staff provided details of several specific regulatory 

applications where the enhanced computing capacity and lower-length scale modeling of DOE's 

advanced modeling and simulation tools could provide new insights for regulatory applications, 

These areas include the potential use of DOE codes to examine the applicability of traditional 

reactor core analysis methods for ATF and to gain insights into the performance of ATF that can 

be used as the staff considers refinements to the regulatory infrastructure ( e,g., refining 

specified acceptable fuel design limits. DOE has indicated it wHI pursue a number of the NRC 

staff's suggested analysis areas in the upcoming fiscal year, 

In addition, the NRC and DOE hold quarterly management meetings to identify areas of mutual 

interest requiring coordination. These meetings cover a range of topics, including activities 

associated with new and advanced reactor deployment and licensing and development of 

computational tools, 

Senator Markey: 

QUESTION 5, One fomutr NRC staff member wrote in a public comment on the 

NRC's proposal that, "The NRC's apparent willingness to abdicate 

the authority to review new fuel assembly designs, before they are 

8 
25 


32793.015

utilized in the reactor core, is unwise and contrary to the goal of 

ensuring the safe use of radioactive materials in order to protect 

people and the environment." Do you agree with this comment? 

The NRC does not agree with this comment The subject comment appears to reference the 

NRC's draft guidance on the licensing of lead test assemblies (LTAs). The nuclear industry has 

used L TAs for decades to collect prototypical reactor data to develop the safety case for larger, 

batch loading of new fuel assembly designs. L TA programs have been conducted through 

various existing regulatory pathways in the past Some have been inserted, without the need 

for prior NRC staff approval, under the NRC change process regulations and in accordance with 

a provision in the plants' technical specifications, which place limitations on the quantity and 

location of lead test assemblies. 

The draft guidance currently being developed by NRC will clarify when an L TA requires NRC 

staff review and approval prior to utilization in the reactor core. Regardless of whether prior 

NRC approval is required, the L TAs are still subject to all of the requirements imposed by the 

regulations, the license, and the technical specifications, including the NRC change control 

regulations that are subject to inspection through the Reactor Oversight Process. Because of 

these requirements, inspections, and operating experience, the NRC believes that the draft 

guidance approach for L TAs is consistent with our safety goals and with the NRC's Principles of 

Good Regulation. 

QUESTION 6. 

ANSWER. 

When the NRC conducts independent reviews, do those reviews 

lessen the risk that plant safety will be compromised? 

9 
26 


32793.016

For some proposed changes to their plants, licensees must submit applications to the NRC 

requesting approval to implement the modifications. In these instances, NRC staff performs 

independent confirmatory reviews and documents its findings in a safety evaluation to ensure 

that the proposed changes to the facility comply with the NRC's regulations. thereby meeting 

the NRC's mandate of ensuring reasonable assurance of adequate protection of public health 

and safely. In other circumstances, there are specific provisions that allow licensees to make 

changes to their licensing basis without prior NRC review and approval. provided those changes 

meet specified criteria that ensure safety. These situations are clearly defined in the regulations 

or within a facility's licensing basis (e.g., 10 CFR 50.59 and plant technical specifications). 

Operation of a plant within its licensing basis, as required, ensures safety and security of people 

and the environment 

In addition, the NRC's reactor inspection process, including resident inspectors stationed at 

every operating nuclear power plant in the U.S., and the Reactor Oversight Process, ensures 

that plants are meeting Federal safety requirements and operating within their licensing basis. 

10 
27 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you very much for your testimony. We 

will have questions in a little bit. 

I would now like to turn to Ms. Taylor. 

Thank you very much for joining us today. 

STATEMENT OF TINA TAYLOR, DEPUTY CHIEF NUCLEAR OFFICER AND SENIOR DIRECTOR OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE 

Ms. TAYLOR. Good morning, Chairman Barrasso, Ranking Member Carper, and members of the Committee. 

My name is Tina Taylor. I am a Senior Director for Research and 

Development and Deputy Chief Nuclear Officer at the Electric 

Power Research Institute, EPRI. I am pleased to be here today to 

talk with you about EPRI’s research related to accident tolerant 

fuels. 

EPRI conducts research and development relating to the generation, delivery, and use of electricity for the benefit of the public. An 

independent, nonprofit organization, EPRI brings its scientists and 

engineers, as well as experts from academia, government, and the 

industry, to help address challenges related to electricity, including 

reliability, efficiency, affordability, health, safety, and the environment. 

EPRI’s members represent approximately 90 percent of the electricity generated and delivered in the United States, including all 

of the U.S. nuclear reactor operators. 

For the past 30 years EPRI has conducted research on nuclear 

fuels for greater reliability, safety, and performance. Our research 

on ATF is focused on evaluating the safety and economic benefits. 

While we are not currently developing any ATF technologies, our 

work is informing strategic decisionmaking for ATF implementation. 

Accident tolerant fuels have the potential to offer safety and environmental benefits with more resilient and efficient fuel and 

plant performance. Key improvements in ATF are higher melting 

temperatures, improved strength and toughness, reduced hydrogen 

generation, and better confinement of nuclear materials during postulated off-normal events. Additionally, ATF may also improve the 

underlying economics. 

Getting these new technologies from design to implementation is 

challenging and involves the collaboration of many organizations. 

As you are hearing today, there is currently great collaboration underway between DOE, NRC, fuel vendors, industry, plant operators, the National Labs, EPRI, and others. 

EPRI’s research is focused on how ATF performance improvements translate into providing more plant resilience to off-normal 

events and economic benefits during normal operation. 

In 2017 EPRI performed an initial assessment of ATF. The performance of ATF concepts was evaluated for a number of scenarios. 

The work concluded that safety benefits do exist and vary among 

different ATF designs and plant designs. 

Some ATF concepts may have mitigated the Three Mile Island 

II accident. Other accident scenarios we evaluated showed that accident tolerant fuels have the potential to provide additional coping 

time. 

28 

A critical metric for decisionmakers is ATF deployment timeframes. The sooner these ATF concepts can be deployed, the sooner 

the safety and economic benefits will be realized. Historically, the 

licensing of new fuels and cladding has taken upwards of 20 years. 

EPRI is researching approaches that could shorten this timeframe. Advanced modeling and simulation with modern data collection methods may be useful to reduce the number of time consuming and costly tests that are needed. Development of new examination techniques may allow quicker results from the tests that 

are performed. 

In conclusion, accident tolerant fuels have the potential to provide increased safety margins over current nuclear fuels while also 

providing enhanced fuel reliability, improved economics, and reduced high level waste generation. Working collaboratively with 

the other stakeholders, EPRI will continue to conduct technical 

evaluation of accident tolerant fuels in order to provide information 

needed to establish criteria, provide safety analysis, and identify 

economic benefits. 

I thank you for the opportunity to testify this morning. I am 

happy to answer your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Taylor follows:] 

29 


32793.017

Tina M. Taylor 

Deputy Chief Nuclear Officer 

Senior Director, Research and Development 

Electric Research Power Institute 

Tina Taylor is Deputy Chief Nuclear Officer and Senior 

Director, R&D and at the Electric Power Research Institute 

(EPRI). She is responsible for a diverse portfolio of research 

addressing the most technically challenging issues facing 

nuclear power. Her team is responsible for work in the areas 

of maintenance, engineering, equipment reliability, 

instrumentation and control, risk and safety management, 

chemistry, fuel, high and low-level waste, and decommissioning. Additionally, Taylor is 

leading EPRI's efforts related to training and technology transfer. 

Taylor has worked in the electric power industry for more than 30 years and joined EPRI 

in 1997. At EPRI, she has worked in a breadth of areas including nuclear power, 

environment, sustainability, renewables and engineering services. 

Prior to joining EPRI, Taylor specialized in chemistry and corrosion in nuclear plants, 

working as a senior engineer at B&W Nuclear Technologies and before that as an 

engineer at Northeast Utilities. 

Taylor holds a Bachelor of Science degree in chemical engineering from Tufts 

University. 
30 


32793.018

Hearing of the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works 

Tina Taylor 

Senior Director Research & Development, Deputy Chief Nuclear Officer, 

Nuclear Sector, Electric Power Research Institute 

"Hearing to explore the safety and associated benefits of licensing accident tolerant fuels for 

commercia/light-water reactors and advanced nuclear reactors." 

September 13,2018 

The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) conducts research and development relating to the 

generation, delivery, and usc of electricity for the benefit of the public. An independent, nonprofit organization, EPRI brings its scientists and engineers, as well as experts from academia, 

government and the industry, to help address challenges in electricity, including reliability, 

efficiency, affordability, health, safely and the environment. EPRT's members represent 

approximately 90 percent of the electricity generated and delivered in the United States, and 

international participation extends to more than 35 countries. 

The subject oftoday's testimony is EPRI's collaborative research efforts related to Accident 

Tolerant Fuels (ATF). ATF has the potential to offer significant safety, environmental, and 

economic benefits. Bringing A TF technologies from design concept to implementation is 

challenging and involves the collaboration of many governmental, public, and private 

stakeholders. This testimony provides an overview ofEPRI's research activities related to the 

potential benefits from ATF as well as the support needed to accelerate further development and 

implementation. 

In the wake of the 2011 Fukushima accident, the priority of accelerating the research and 

development of ATF technologies was recognized by Congress, the Department of Energy 

(DOE), and the nuclear industry. As a result, the DOE initiated a ten-year program with the goal 

of inserting test rods with enhanced accident tolerance into a commercial reactor by 2022. 

With the strong support of the nnclcar industry, this goal was achieved in early 2018 at Southern 

Nuclear's Hatch Power Plant, located in Baxley, Georgia. Hatch loaded two different ATF 

concepts for testing into the reactor, a first for the U.S. industry. This was a significant 

achievement, but technical and regulatory hurdles still remaiu if the U.S. is to achieve fi.!ll,eore 

ATF deployment by the mid-2020s. Traditionally, licensing of new fuels designs can take 20 

years. In order to realize the benefits of accident tolerant fuels in a meaningful time frame, 

collaborative and innovative approaches are being leveraged. 
31 


32793.019

Overview of Accident Tolerant Fuel 

The U.S. nuclear industry has been aggressively pursuing ATF concepts with the goal to improve 

performance during nom1al operations and accident conditions and to deploy these fuels by the 

early to mid-2020s. 

Accident tolerant fuels are defined as fuels that can tolerate a loss of active cooling in the core for 

a longer time period than current fuel options, while maintaining and improving fuel, system, and 

plant performance during normal operation. The potential for ATF is to provide more resilient 

performance during hypothetical accident scenarios while providing more efficient performance 

during normal operation. 

Key A TF targeted parameters under consideration and development include: 

Decreased conosion rates 

• Higher melting temperatures 

• Reduced hydrogen generation dnring postulated accidents 

• Improved strength, toughness, and high temperature behavior 

• Enhanced behavior to ramp more quickly for flexible power operations 

• Better confinement of radioactive materials during postulated accidents 

Improved resistance to wear and foreign material damage 

The ATF concepts under active development can be divided into two categories: near-term and 

longer-term concepts, based on their anticipated timeline to full core deployment. Near-term 

concepts can use the cunent licensing structure with current regulations and regulatory guidance 

to allow for licensing of these ATF concepts. These near-term concepts are expected to be 

commercially viable for full-core deployment by the mid-2020s. Longcr-tenn concepts have more 

gaps in data, regulatmy acceptance criteria, limiting regulations and regulatory guidance. As a 

result, these concepts are expected to take a longer period of time to develop and license prior to 

r~ull-core deployment in operating commercial reactors. 

\Vhether A TF is adopted by commercial reactor operators will be a business decision. EPRJ's 

research plays a role to inium1 key indust1y decision-makers on the potential ATF safety and 

economic benefits for their plants. A critical metric for the industry decision-makers is ATF 

deployment timeframcs. ]be sooner these ATF concepts can be deployed, the sooner the safety 

and economic benefits will be realized. Historically, the licensing of new fuels and cladding 

within the current regulatory infrastructure has taken upwards of twenty years. An expedited 

approach to reduce licensing timcframes could lead to quicker deployment of these new fuels. 

The research, development, licensing, and deployment of ATF represents a substantial investment 

and collaboration among fuel vendors, operating utilities, research institutions, regulatory 

authorities, and other governmental agencies. Substantial safety and economic benefits may be 

required to justifY the adoption and wide-spread implementation of the new fuel technologies, 

e.g., increased safety margins, enhanced fuel reliability, improved economic benefits, optimized 

fuel cycle operational strategies, and reduced waste generation. 

2 
32 


32793.020

EPRI Research and Development 

EPRI has been conducting research over the past 30 years on advanced fuels seeking greater 

reliability, safety, and performance. During that time, EPRI has collaborated with key domestic 

governmental and commercial stakeholders to conduct research and development activities to 

inform fuel reliability, performance, cost-savings, efficiencies and safety. 

In the late 1990s, EPRI created its Robust Fuel Program to assess high bumup fuels under normal 

reactor operations and postulated accident scenarios. This work has also informed the dry storage 

and transportation of high bumup Ji1el. In the early 2000's, the focus ofEPRI's research shifted to 

improved lite! reliability and operational issues to reduce f11el failures. 

Recently, EPRI fuel programs have focused research efforts to inform further potential safety and 

economic benefits of A TF technologies, higher uranium enrichments and discharge bum ups. 

While EPRI is not currently developing any A TF technology, it is informing public and private 

stakeholders with key safety, economic, and operational technical analyses to support strategic 

decision-making for potential A TF implementation. 

The Potential Benefits of A TF Technologies 

The early adoption of ATF by commercial reactor owners/operators is predicated on the need to 

assess the potential benefits from ATF and the associated implementation costs. In 2017, EPRI 

performed an initial assessment of expected ATF performance. This work was done to assess and 

quantifY the various safety enhancements offered by various ATF concepts. For the initial ATF 

safety impacts assessment, the performance of each A TF concept was evaluated for a number of 

postulated accidents. These assessments consisted of performing safety analyses for key accident 

sequences and comparing the ATF results against those obtained for the same events calculated 

using current zirconium uranium oxide fuel designs. 

At this stage of ATF development, there are significant uncertainties associated with the 

proposed ATF concepts. The analysis will need to be updated as additional test data become 

available. 1be key conclusions from EPRI's initial ATF study include: 

• Safety benefits exist and vary among the different A TF concepts and plant characteristics 

• Specific A TF concepts may have limited the Three Mile Island-2 core damage 

• Other accident scenarios that were modeled showed that accident tolerant fuels have the 

potential to provide additional coping time 

EPRI is conducting a second study to build on the initial results. The current work includes 

additional accident scenarios, fuel cycle optimization (increased enrichment and discharge 

bumups) assessments, and exploration of additional benefits not previously studied. These 

efforts have identified three major areas of potential economic benefits that can result from more 

resilient ATF fiJels including: 

• Increased fuel reliability 
33 


32793.021

More efficient fuel cycles that could also reduce the amount of generated waste 

• More robust fuel perfonnance leading to improved operational flexibility 

These potential benefits could provide plant operational performance enhancements and/or 

substantial cost reductions and/or plant operational performance enhancements. 

ATF concepts potentially include more durable materials that may provide better fuel reliability. 

These innovative designs and materials may provide enhanced reliability by reducing possible 

fuel failures and preventing the potential for plant shutdowns. Fuel cycle optimization through 

higher enrichments and discharge burnups would allow for improved fuel efficiencies. 

Improved A IF material performance enables the potential for higher discharge burnups which 

provides the potential for higher enrichments and improved fuel cycle efficiencies. This may 

allow certain plants to go from 18 to 24-month fuel reloading which could reduce the amount of 

fuel needed, thereby, reducing the amount of waste generated. 

Moreover, the enhanced ATF fuel performance could also lead to greater operational flexibilities 

which could improve integration of nuclear plants with other non-C02 emitting electricity 

generating sources. EPRI plans to evaluate enhanced flexible power operations in the near future. 

EPRl also plans to finalize a report in early 2019 documenting the safety benefits results that 

could lead to these economic benefits. 

Innovations for Accelerated Implementation 

Traditionally, qualification and licensing of new fuel designs has taken over twenty years. 

Innovative approaches can collect test data more rapidly and efficiently than the current 

paradigm of irradiation tests followed by destructive post-irradiation examinations at domestic 

and international hot cells. The time required to irradiate, cool down (for transp01tation), 

transport fi·om irradiation facility to hot cell, and destructively test at the hot cell takes several 

years for each test. Several such tests have been carried out to demonstrate safety for new fuel 

licensing in the past, leading to the greater than twenty-year design-to-licensing timeframes for 

new fuels. Alternative advanced data collection methods conld shorten this timeframe by 

collecting data in situ or without destructive examinations using sophisticated non-destructive 

techniques, which could reduce the transportation and destructive examination steps. EPRl is 

working to develop non-destructive examination teclmiques that could lead to quick data 

collection without the need for shipping and destructive examination. 

Advanced modeling and simulation (M&S) along with new expedited experimental data 

collection methods through advanced sensors and non-destructive evaluation techniques could be 

used to provide sufficient technical information to support ATF implementation. The 

development of advanced M&S can facilitate ATF implementation with key support to utilities 

and vendors on design considerations, normal operation evaluations, ATF fuel performance 

assessments, and for licensing. Enhanced capabilities of advanced M&S, combined with targeted 

experimental data, can help provide confidence in the designs of ATF technologies. 

4 
34 


32793.022

The use of these new data collection and modeling tools can reduce the time and cost of 

introducing innovative technologies into operating nuclear plants by reducing the number of 

time-consuming and costly tests and demonstrations, potentially addressing one of the major 

hurdles in getting ATF to market sooner. A focused collaboration between the U.S. industry, 

EPRI, DOE, and NRC can help expedite the implementation of ATF concepts. 

Current regulations are focused and fixed to the current fuel systems which are also applicable to 

the near-term A TF concepts. However, the lack of licensing acceptance criteria and regulatory 

expectations for longer-term ATF concepts limit vendors to develop experimental test plans and 

licensing strategies. The need for regulatory clarity and predictability can be alleviated through a 

collaborative process involving the key stakeholders to collectively identify and align on the gaps 

in regulatory acceptance criteria and data related to various fuel designs. This gap identification 

process involves working with technical regulatory specialists and subject matter experts to 

identify and define the key knowledge gaps in test data, modeling, licensing methodologies, 

regulations, and guidance. This effort can help prioritize the work to be done to fill the gaps, help 

all stakeholders align on a schedule and improve certainty in the process. 

Irradiation Testing Facilities 

Test reactor irradiations are traditionally and important step in the development of new fuels. In 

the past year, the nuclear industry lost a key asset in the Halden test reactor which had been 

operated since 1958 at the Norwegian Institute for Energy Technology (IFE) and funded by 19 

countries under the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Nuclear Energy 

Agency (OECDINEA). 

The DOE is in the process of defining the path forward without Halden. At this point, there does 

not seem to be a significant delay for the near-term A TF concepts. For the longer-term needs, 

EPRI is working with key domestic and international (OECDINEA) stakeholders to identify a 

long-term solution to provide irradiation test facilities that can support longer-term A TF 

concepts. 

Halden had unique capabilities for real-time monitoring and testing during irradiation while 

simulating the operating environments of existing U.S. reactors. All four vendors of ATF 

(Global Nuclear Fuels, Westinghouse, Framatome, and Lightbridge/Enfission) were current or 

prospective users of the Halden test reactor and hot cell facilities. Since Halden was scheduled 

to perform testing for all four U.S. ATF vendors, the unexpected loss of Halden will require 

some reconfiguration of the research and development plans in advance of commercial 

deployment of ATF. 

Concluding Remarks 

Accident Tolerant Fuels have the potential to provide increased safety margins over current nuclear 

fi.Jels while also providing enhanced fuel reliability, improved economics through optimized fuel 

cycles, and reduced high-level waste generation. Accident Tolerant Fuels may enable utilities to 

realize additional economic and operational benefits from increased enrichments, higher 

5 
35 


32793.023

discharge bmnups, and higher resiliency for more efficient operations and cost savings. EPfU 

will continue to conduct technical evaluation of accident tolerant fuels in order to provide 

information needed to establish criteria, provide safety analysis and identify economic benefits. 

6 
36 


32793.024

U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Pnblic Works 

September 13, 2018 Hearing: Advanced Nuclear Technology: Sofety and Associated Benefits 

of Licensing Accident Tolerant Fuels 

Questions for the Record Submitted by Ms. Tina Taylor 

Question from Chairman Barrasso 

Question l: 

The .focus (if the Department of Energy's public-private partnership to develop accident tolerant 

fuels is the deployment of this safer fi;el in commercia/nuclear power plants located in the 

United States. However, nuclear power is utilized around the world. 

What are the pote/1/ia/ global market opportunity for US -based vendors if the NRC is the first 

regulator to approve and lllilize sqfer nuclearfi.~efs? 

The U.S.-based fuel vendors currently sell fuel outside of the U.S. and are developing accident 

tolerant fuels for a global market. One of the tuel vendors already has a lead test rod in a 

commercial reactor in Switzerland. 

The regulators in each country will develop their own criteria for licensing advanced fuel and 

will assess various technologies against that criteria. As the NRC reviews and possibly approves 

the use of accident tolerant fuels, international regulators will have access to this information and 

can factor that into their independent analysis. This may help speed up acceptance in other 

markets. 
37 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you, Ms. Taylor. I appreciate your testimony. 

Mr. Williams. 

STATEMENT OF JOHN B. WILLIAMS, NUCLEAR FUELS AND 

ANALYSIS DIRECTOR, SOUTHERN NUCLEAR OPERATING 

COMPANY 

Mr. WILLIAMS. Good morning. 

I am John B. Williams, Nuclear Fuels and Analysis Director at 

Southern Nuclear Operating Company and am a member of the 

Nuclear Energy Institute’s Accident Tolerant Fuel Working Group 

led by Mr. Danny Bost, Executive Vice President and Chief Nuclear 

Officer of Southern Nuclear. 

Southern Nuclear, a subsidiary of the Southern Company, currently operates six nuclear reactors in Alabama and Georgia. 

Southern Nuclear embodies the Southern Company’s commitment 

to creating America’s energy future by developing new products 

and services for the benefits of consumers through technological innovation. 

As such, we are proud to be taking a leadership role in the development and testing of accident tolerant fuel. 

It is an honor to appear before this committee to share my views 

on the benefits of accident tolerant fuels and how we can overcome 

the development and licensing challenges before us. 

I thank Chairman Barrasso, Ranking Member Carper, and the 

Committee members for taking the time today to discuss this pivotal technology that has the potential to make our Nation’s nuclear 

fleet more reliable and efficient, as well as enhance its safety. 

America’s nuclear power plants run 24 hours a day, 7 days a 

week, providing 20 percent of the Nation’s electricity and nearly 60 

percent of its clean, emissions-free power. The nuclear fleet is a 

vital part of America’s infrastructure and is essential to a reliable 

and resilient national grid. 

The sustainability of the U.S. nuclear fleet will depend, in large 

part, on the industry’s ability to innovate at a pace which will 

allow the plants to remain economically competitive with other rapidly advancing energy technologies. 

One such innovation is accident tolerant fuels. ATF has shown 

potential to increase safety as well as increase fuel and system efficiency and performance. 

The industry is making investments and moving forward. Southern Nuclear loaded two kinds of ATF cladding in our Hatch plant 

in February 2018. In 2019 three major fuel vendors in the ATF program plan to insert additional lead test assemblies in reactors operated by Southern Nuclear and Exelon Generating. 

The results of this testing, and other tests being conducted by 

the Department of Energy, will provide fuel performance data and 

inform NRC fuel licensing. Testing and licensing activities will be 

conducted in parallel, which will help to accelerate the development 

timeline toward the goal of beginning batch loads of ATF fuel in 

commercial reactors by 2023 and full deployment by 2026. This 

timing is intended to support utility decisions regarding second license renewal. 

38 

The industry is appreciative of the NRC’s plan to license fuel in 

an innovative way, while maintaining the highest levels of safety. 

Additionally, we are greatly benefiting from the DOE’s National 

Lab’s vast expertise and world class testing, modeling, and simulation capabilities. 

We are grateful for the close attention and support Congress has 

provided to ATF and for its recognition that this program represents the cutting edge of innovation that will help preserve 

America’s technological and strategic leadership. 

I, like you, Senator Carper, like win-wins. The successful development of accident tolerant fuel has the potential to provide a win 

for everyone, safety, the environment, consumers, and plant operators by making light water reactors safer as well as more efficient 

and reliable. 

In the process, if we develop a model for the transformation and 

modernization of the regulatory framework for nuclear plants, even 

better. For this to become a reality, we all—industry, regulators, 

the Department of Energy, and Congress—must continue to work 

together without delay. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Williams follows:] 

39 


32793.025

John B. Williams 

Nuclear Fuel & Analysis Director 

Southern Nuclear Operating Company 

John B. Williams is the Nuclear Fuel & Analysis Director for 

Southern Nuclear Operating Company. In this role, he is 

responsible for nuclear fuel, safety analysis, and risk-informed 

engineering for the Southern Nuclear fleet of generating plants. 

Additionally, John is the Corporate Functional Area Manager for 

the Fuel & Reactor Engineering functional area. 

John joined Southern Nuclear as an engineer at the Southern 

Nuclear Corporate Headquarters in 2005. He has more than 20 years of experience in 

nuclear fuel, specifically reactor core design and licensing, dry storage of spent nuclear 

fuel, nuclear fuel procurement, and reactor engineering. Prior to joining Southern 

Nuclear, he was a nuclear engineer for the Tennessee Valley Authority. 

John serves on the Department of Energy Industry Advisory Board for the Advanced 

Fuels Campaign and is the Utility Lead for the Nuclear Energy Institute ATF Working 

Group Safety Benefits Task Force. 

John is a graduate of the Georgia Institute of Technology. He lives in Birmingham, AL 

with his wife, Carol. 
40 


32793.026

STATEMENT OF JOHN WILLIAMS, SOUTHERN NUCLEAR OPERATING COMPANY 

BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ADVANCED NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY: SAFETY AND ASSOCIATED BENEFITS OF LICENSING ACCIDENT 

TOLERANT FUEL FOR COMMERCIAL NUCLEAR REACTORS 

September 13, 2018 

INTRODUCTION 

I am John Williams, Nuclear Fuel and Analysis Director at Southern Nuclear Operating Company. I am 

responsible for nuclear fuel, safety analysis, and risk-informed engineering for the Southern Nuclear 

fleet of generating plants, and am the Corporate Functional Area Manager for the Fuel & Reactor 

Engineering functional area. I am also a member ofthe Nuclear Energy Institute's Accident Tolerant 

Fuel Working Group, which is charged with guiding industry policy and action and is led by Mr. Danny 

Bast, Executive Vice President and Chief Nuclear Officer of Southern Nuclear. 

SOUTHERN COMPANY 

Southern Company is a natural gas and electric utility holding company headquartered in Atlanta, 

Georgia, with executive offices also located in Birmingham, Alabama. The nation's premier energy 

company, Southern Company provides clean, safe, reliable, affordable energy to 9 million gas and 

electric utility customers in 11 states. Southern Company is developing the full portfolio of energy 

resources, including carbon-free nuclear, advanced carbon capture technologies, natural gas, 

renewables, energy efficiency and storage technology, and creating new products and services for the 

benefit of customers. 

Innovation is a central part of our strategy. We foster a culture that seeks to make transformational 

changes and understand that innovation and technology are engines of American greatness. We actively 

collaborate with the U.S. government, other utilities, universities and technology developers and remain 

at the forefront of technology development for the production, delivery and end-use of energy. 

Southern Nuclear 

Southern Nuclear, a subsidiary of Southern Company, currently operates six nuclear reactors: Units 1 and 2 

at Plant Farley near Dothan, Alabama; Units 1 and 2 at Plant Hatch near Baxley, Georgia; and Units 1 and 2 

at Plant Vogtle near Augusta, Georgia. 1 Together, Plants Farley, Hatch and Vogtle provide approximately 

20% of the electricity used in Alabama and Georgia. This is made possible by our talented and committed 

workforce of more than 4,000 men and women working at our fleet of nuclear power plants and corporate 

1 Plant Farley is owned by Alabama Power Company. Plants Hatch and Vogtle are co-owned by Georgia Power 

Company, Oglethorpe Power Corporation, the Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia, and Dalton Utilities. 
41 


32793.027

offices, all of whom are also part of the larger Southern Company team of over 32,000 employees who are 

building the future of energy for the customers they serve. Southern Nuclear, as a subsidiary of the 

Southern Company, embodies the company's commitment to creating America's energy future and 

developing new products and services for the benefit of consumers through technological innovation. As 

such, we are proud to be taking a leadership role in the development and testing of Accident Tolerant Fuel 

(ATF). 

It is an honor to appear before this Committee to share my views on the benefits of accident tolerant 

fuels and how we can overcome the development and licensing challenges before us. I thank Chairman 

Barrasso, Ranking Member Carper, and the Committee Members for taking the time today to discuss 

this pivotal technology that has the potential to make our Nation's nuclear fleet more reliable and 

efficient, as well as enhance its safety. 

NEED FOR NUCLEAR INNOVATION, HOW ATF WILl ADVANCE NUClEAR SAFETY (AND EFFICIENCY OF 

EVERYDAY OPERATIONS) 

America's nuclear power plants run 24 hours a day, seven days a week, providing 20 percent of the 

nation's electricity and nearly 60 percent of its clean, emissions-free power. The nuclear fleet is a vital 

part of America's critical infrastructure, and an essential linchpin of a reliable, resilient national grid. 

However, the sustainability of the US nuclear fleet will depend, in large part, on industry's ability to 

innovate at a pace which will allow the plants to remain economically competitive with other rapidly 

advancing energy technologies. I am proud to be leading a significant effort, currently, well underway, 

on one such innovation- Accident Tolerant Fuels- which has significant potential in this regard. The US 

Nuclear industry, in partnership with the Department of Energy (DOE), is developing highly advanced 

new fuels which offer improved performance under both accident and normal operating conditions. 

They have the potential to provide significant additional safety margin to protect the public and 

environment. The effort to develop ATF designs is accelerating as the value that these technologies 

bring becomes more apparent. 

Early research and analysis work on advanced fuels has shown potential for the enhanced robustness 

and other properties of accident-tolerant fuels to (1) increase safety under [rare] accident conditions 

and (2) increase fuel and system efficiency, performance and therefore profitability under normal 

operating conditions. 

The industry sees enough potential in the ATF program that we are pushing for an accelerated timeline 

for testing, analysis and licensing, with a goal for final deployment of ATF across the existing reactor 

fleet by the early- to mid-2020s. 

The industry's rationale for an accelerated timeline is that utilities will be making second license renewal 

decisions by the early 2020s. Those decisions will be informed by whatever enhanced safety and 

economic benefits are evident from the results of the development program. 

2 
42 


32793.028

THE PATH FORWARD 

Time is of the essence, and we are focused on accelerating the program by coordinating our activities 

across the fields of R&D, testing, modeling and simulation, licensing preparation, and safety and 

economic benefit analysis. Historically, development of new nuclear fuels can take upward of 20 years. 

Development on that time line is not practical. The industry is working closely with the U.S. Department 

of Energy (DOE) and the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to innovate on licensing and 

development, while maintaining the highest levels of safety. ATF presents an opportunity to showcase a 

transformative, risk-informed and streamlined regulatory and licensing framework. 

FIRST LTAs LOADED AT HATCH 

The industry is making investments and moving forward. We loaded two kinds of ATF cladding in 

Southern's Hatch plant in February-the first of many in-reactor tests to come across the nuclear 

industry. We will also be loading new fuel and cladding concepts at our Vogtle plant in early 2019. 

While the results from the Hatch test won't be available until the next refueling outage, we did learn 

from the experience about the regulatory framework that needs to be in place to ensure that future 

tests can take place in a timely manner. 

FUTURE LTAs 

Between now and 2022, the three majorfuel vendors in the ATF program (General Electric/GNF; 

Westinghouse/General Atomics; and Framatome) will be inserting lead test assemblies comprising 

several concepts of advanced accident-tolerant fuel and cladding in U.S. commercial reactors operated 

by Southern and Exelon. The results of this testing (and of other tests being conducted in DOE research 

reactors and labs) will provide fuel performance data from commercial reactor environments and inform 

NRC licensing activities. 

Some of these activities will be conducted in parallel, which will help to accelerate the deployment 

timeline toward the desired goal of beginning batch loads of ATF fuel in commercial reactors by 2023, 

and full deployment by 2026. 

ATF FUNDING 2018-2019 

We are grateful for the strong support demonstrated by both the Senate and House of Representatives 

for this program. The levels of funding are adequate to continue the development of the technologies in 

partnership with the DOE. We are grateful for the close attention and support that Congress has 

provided to ATF, and for its recognition that this program represents the cutting edge of innovation that 

will help preserve America's technological and strategic leadership. 

NRC ATF LICENSING PLAN 

The industry also is appreciative of the NRC's plans to license fuel in an innovative way which can 

accelerate the deployment of ATF in the marketplace. The NRC staff and Commission have been 

extremely diligent in coordinating their efforts with those of DOE and the industry to develop a 

3 
43 


32793.029

comprehensive and risk-informed licensing plan. The NRC's Transformation Initiative is also partly 

geared toward streamlining the regulatory framework for the timely and efficient licensing of innovative 

technologies such as ATF. 

DOE ATF ACTIVITIES IN SUPPORT OF INDUSTRY 

Our collaborative relationship and partnership with the DOE and National Labs cannot be understated. 

The National Lab testing, modeling and simulation, and coordination with the NRC on code development 

for licensing reviews, are essential aspects of the fuel development. We greatly benefit from the Labs' 

vast expertise and world class testing capabilities. 

As an example of U.S. leadership, it is expected laterthis month that Idaho National Laboratory's unique 

TREAT facility will perform its first pulse test in more than 20 years, in an experiment to gather baseline 

data for ATF testing. The TREAT reactor is a national asset that was specifically designed to test and 

qualify nuclear fuels and determine their safety margins. It first opened in 1959 and was restarted last 

year after being shut down in 1994. 

SAFETY AND ECONOMIC BENEFITS REPORT 

Ultimately, the widespread use of these innovative technologies will depend upon the safety and 

economic benefits. The industry is keenly focused on understanding the range of potential benefits and 

is also evaluating how ATF can be an enabler to additional benefits from increased enrichment and fuel 

burnup. It is our intent to document the benefits in a report to be issued in the next several months. 

These efforts are closely coordinated with the Electric Power Research Institute, who is leading several 

of the analyses to ensure an independent perspective on the results. 

CONCLUSION 

The phase "win/win" has become a bit of a cliche, but the successful development of accident tolerant 

fuels has the potential to provide a win for everyone- safety, the environment, consumers, and plant 

operators- by making light water reactors even safer, as well as more efficient and reliable. If in the 

process, we develop a model for the transformation and modernization of the regulatory framework for 

nuclear plants, even better. However, for all of this to have meaning, we all- industry, regulators, 

Department of Energy and Congress, must continue to work together without delay. 

4 
44 


32793.030

Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works 

Hearing entitled, "Advanced Nuclear Technology: Safety and Associated Benefits of 

Licensing Accident Tolerant Fuels for Coi1Uilercial Nuclear Reactors" 

September 13,2018 

Responses to Questions for the Record by Mr. Williams 

Chairman Barrasso 

I. Previous NRC licensing processes for nuclear fuel took more than 20 years to complete. 

What technological advances have been made that would shorten the time for NRC to 

license ATF? 

The most significant technological advances that could accelerate new fuclliccnsing arc 

in the area of advanced modeling and simulation. The use of these tools can pinpoint 

areas where physical tests or experiments need to be conducted and improve the 

etliciency of data collection for the licensing process. 

2. Your testimony described the regulatory process needed for Accident Tolerant Fuel 

(A TF) as "trans formative." Do you think establishing a new process for licensing ATF 

could transform the way the NRC addresses other licensing challenges? 

While A TF licensing will not require a new regulatory framework, two fbeus areas for 

accelerated ATF licensing are increased reliance on modeling and simulation and 

conducting aspects of the licensing reviews in paralleL Both of these areas can contribute 

to addressing licensing challenges for advanced technologies. 

3. What does "increased flexibility" as a feature of ATF mean to plant operators, and how 

can A TF flexibility help integrate nuclear power into a grid that has an increasing amount 

of intermittent power sources, like wind and solar? 

Intermittent power sources on the grid are challenging the status quo operation of nuclear 

units that have historically operated at near full capacity 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. 

Features of ATF can improve the ability of the nuclear units to respond to the need of 

grid operators to reduce or increase load quickly. Additionally, the margin provided by 

the fuel allows plant operators to be more flexible in their operation without challenging 

plant safety analyses. 

Page 1 of 2 
45 


32793.031

Senator Markey: 

4. Do you think it is a good idea to take the NRC out of the review process when testing 

new fuels? 

The NRC has always been, and will continue to be, a part of the testing, qualification and 

licensing of nuclear fuels through the use of NRC-approved Technical Specifications 

allowing for the insertion of lead test assemblies or through the approval of topical 

reports and license amendment requests for loading of new fuel designs. 

5. If accident tolerant fuels are developed that improve plant safety, is there a risk that plant 

operators could feel that they can reduce safety margins in other areas, such as 

emergency preparedness? 

At this time, the industry is not pursuing any changes in emergency preparedness as a 

result of improved safety margins provided by accident tolerant fuels. 

Page 2 of 2 
46 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you so much for your testimony, Mr. 

Williams. 

Ms. Back. 

STATEMENT OF CHRISTINA A. BACK, PH.D., VICE PRESIDENT, 

NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGIES AND MATERIALS, GENERAL 

ATOMICS 

Ms. BACK. Senators Barrasso and Carper, thank you for your invitation to appear. I am pleased to discuss our perspective on 

NRC’s approach to accident tolerant fuel licensing. 

We believe the NRC must be prepared to license new fuels and 

claddings in the most timely way, while also ensuring that public 

safety is not undermined. To stop the premature shutdown of existing reactors, there is no time to waste. 

In response to Fukushima, Congress appropriated funding for 

the ATF program to support the development of a new breed of nuclear fuels and claddings that provide enhanced safety margins. 

In the 6 years since, significant progress has been achieved by 

three separate industry teams supported by the Department of Energy. The Westinghouse-General Atomics team is one of those. We 

are pursuing a highly innovative ATF technology offering markedly 

enhanced safety features and significantly improved economics for 

existing reactors. 

It will do so by allowing operation at higher power and for longer 

periods of time, thus enabling fuel recycles that can last as long as 

2 years, compared to the 18 months now possible. Higher efficiency 

and less maintenance down time mean a more economically competitive reactor. 

Consequently, many utilities have been strongly supportive of 

the development and expeditious deployment of these new fuels. 

GA is developing the cladding material, made from a novel advanced silicon carbide ceramic composite. The material, named 

SiGA, was initially developed for our innovative Energy Multiplier 

Module, EM 2, an advanced high temperature, gas cooled, small 

modular reactor concept. 

We believe the future of nuclear energy depends heavily on developing the new materials such as those that survive much higher 

temperatures and are much less chemically reactive. That is why 

we have invested significantly in SiGA material that safely can 

withstand temperatures of up to 1,800 degrees Celsius compared to 

metal claddings, such as Zircaloy, that start to fail around 800 degrees. 

I am holding an example of a rodlet that will be inserted next 

year into the Advanced Test Reactor at the Idaho National Lab. It 

will undergo irradiations that will provide important data on the 

cladding performance in realistic reactor conditions. 

Incredibly, we make this cladding starting from silicon carbide 

fiber. It is very flexible. The process we use creates a kind of rebar 

into our material, transforming it from a brittle ceramic into a fracture-tough material. Our results are very promising, and if they 

hold up, we will revolutionize the industry. 

Ultimately, the same technology can be used in our EM 2 and 

other advanced reactors. Whether for ATF or advanced reactors, we 

must modernize our licensing processes before the reactors are lost. 

47 

I view the ATF licensing as a key step toward establishing good 

practices for advanced reactor licensing. Modernization means we 

will develop new and accelerated NRC processes without compromising the NRC’s high safety standards. We must do this quickly. 

For example, GA is developing a new methodology that we call 

Advance Fuel Qualification, AFQ. The idea, supported by DOE for 

funding, is to leverage computer modeling and simulation to reduce 

the amount of data needed for licensing. 

Regardless of whether this methodology or another is implemented, early and sustained NRC involvement is key. I am pleased 

to see that the NRC draft project plan for the ATF recognizes that 

the past licensing path, which relies primarily on empirical data for 

fuel performance, cannot be the way of the future. 

Good progress in licensing has been made for near-term technologies such as the metal coated claddings, but we also have to 

achieve the same progress for our long-term technologies, the more 

innovative technologies like ours that will require different assessments and regulations. 

Since our SiGA cladding is a ceramic and not a metal, this revolutionary technology will be delayed until the NRC develops technical acceptance criteria for licensing approval. The good news is 

that the longer term technologies may be available only 2 to 3 

years after the near term if the NRC moves promptly on them. 

We welcome engagement with the NRC so that we can assist 

them fully in understanding these materials so they can develop 

their validation plan and license in the most timely and safe fashion. 

We have been using technologies in the nuclear industry that is 

over 60 years old. It is time that we adopt new technologies, particularly those from materials sciences, not because it would be 

nice to have, but because they are needed for our industry’s survival. 

To be successful, the NRC, DOE, and industry must work closely 

together. If we do, we will find new ways to produce nuclear energy 

safely, cleanly, and at a much lower cost. 

We hope this Committee will use its oversight and legislative 

powers to ensure that the NRC continues to design the new procedures it needs to license new technologies. Please visit San Diego. 

Seeing the fabrication in action will bring home to you the clear example of how ingenuity can transform the nuclear industry. 

I thank you for your interest and support. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Back follows:] 

48 


32793.032

Christina A. Back, Ph.D. 

Vice President, 

Nuclear Technologies and Materials 

General Atomics 

Dr. Christina Back has 28 years of experience leading 

research in private industry and U.S. Department of Energy 

(DOE) laboratories, including the DOE weapons complex. 

She is an internationally recognized expert in both fission 

and fusion energy research and regularly serves on 

committees for the National Academy of Sciences, National Nuclear Security 

Administration, and the DOE. She has over one hundred peer-reviewed publications, is 

a Fellow of the American Physical Society and is frequently invited to provide expertise 

for U.S. Congressional Committees and White House Science and Technology 

initiatives. 

At General Atomics, Dr. Back is responsible for nuclear fission programs, which draw on 

a diverse portfolio of innovative technologies. Current activities focus on the 

development of advanced nuclear reactors for electric power, production of isotopes for 

medical uses, and fabrication of Accident Tolerant Fuel rods for safer nuclear reactors, 

among other projects. 

Dr. Back earned her B.S. in physics from Yale University, and her Ph.D. in plasma 

physics from the University of Florida. She also spent two years as an experimentalist at 

the Ecole Polytechnique in France. Prior to joining General Atomics, Dr. Back spent 13 

years performing research using high powered lasers at Lawrence Livermore National 

Laboratory in the Inertial Confinement Fusion and High Energy Density Science 

programs. She has devoted more than two decades to energy research and holds an 

active DOE-Q and US Department of Defense clearance. 

Dr. Back has received numerous awards for her many noted contributions to the field, 

including the DOE Technical Excellence Award and Defense Nuclear Sciences Award. 

In 2013, she was named Woman of the Year in Business by the San Diego East County 

Chamber of Commerce. 
49 


32793.033

Testimony of Christina Back, Ph.D. 

V.P., Nuclear Technologies and Materials, General Atomics 

Before the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works 

September 13,2018 

Chairman Barrasso and Ranking Member Carper, thank you for your invitation to 

appear before you today. I am pleased to discuss our perspective on NRC's 

approach to Accident Tolerant Fuel licensing issues. 

We think it is extremely important that the NRC be prepared to license these 

innovative new fuels and claddings in the most timely way, while also ensuring 

that public safety is not undermined in the process of doing so. If we want to 

capture the benefits of these new technologies, and help stop the premature 

shutdown of existing reactors, there is literally no time to waste. 

In response to the Fukushima accident of March 2011, Congress in FY12 

appropriated funding for the Accident Tolerant Fuels (or ATF) program within the 

Department of Energy to support the development of a new breed of nuclear fuels 

and claddings. These were to be designed to offer significantly enhanced safety 

margins to avoid fuel meltdown in the low likelihood of a nuclear accident. 

In the six years since then, significant progress has been achieved in the design, 

engineering and initial testing of several ATF concepts being developed by three 

separate industry teams supported by DOE. The Westinghouse-General Atomics 

team is one of those. 

The Westinghouse-General Atomics team is pursuing a highly innovative and 

promising ATF technology. Not only is it designed to offer markedly enhanced 

safety features, it also should significantly improve the overall economics of 

operating the existing fleet of nuclear reactors. It will do so by creating the 

capability to operate at higher power and for longer periods of time, thus 

increasing fuel utilization, reducing waste, and making possible refueling cycles of 

as long as 2 years, compared to the 18 months now possible. Higher efficiency, and 

less maintenance down-time, mean a more economically competitive reactor. 

With the t!nancial challenges that have led to the premature shutdown of several 

reactors, such enhanced performance could significantly improve the economic 

competitiveness of the current fleet. Consequently, many utilities have been 
50 


32793.034

strongly supportive of the development and expeditious deployment of these 

advanced accident tolerant fuels. 

At General Atomics we are developing the cladding material, made from a novel 

form of an advanced ceramic composite of silicon carbide, that will house the 

Westinghouse uranium-based fuel pellets. 

GA has been investing in the development of this advanced silicon carbide 

composite material since well before the Fukushima accident. This material, which 

we call SiGA1M, was initially developed for our innovative Energy Multiplier 

Module, EM2

, an advanced high temperature gas-cooled fast small modular reactor 

concept. 

We believe the future of nuclear energy depends heavily on developing the new 

materials that will survive much higher temperatures, and be much less chemically 

reactive than those we have today. That's why we've invested significantly in 

silicon carbide composites that safely can withstand temperatures of 1800 degrees 

Celsius compared to metal claddings, such as the current zircaloy, that start to fail 

around 800 degrees. 

I am holding an example of the rodlet that will be inserted into the Advanced Test 

Reactor (A TR) at the Idaho National Lab in March of next year, 6 months from 

now. It will undergo an irradiation test that will provide valuable data on the 

cladding performance in realistic reactor conditions. 

Incredibly, we make our cladding tubes starting from silicon carbide thread. This 

process creates a kind of rebar into our material, transforming it from a brittle 

ceramic into an extremely fracture-tough material. Our results have been promising 

so far. If they hold up, we could truly revolutionize this industry. 

Ultimately, the same technology can be used in advanced reactors, such as gascooled, or molten salt reactors. For instance, at GA, a slightly different cladding 

configuration would be used with uranium carbide fuel to be the fuel rod in EM2• 

And molten salt reactors need materials, such as our SiGA1M ceramic composite, 

that will not corrode as most metals do. 

Whether accident tolerant fuel, or advanced reactors, we must modernize our 

licensing processes before more reactors are shut down. I view the ATF licensing 

as a key first step toward licensing new technology advanced reactors. We must 

look to new and accelerated NRC activities and processes to license highly 
51 


32793.035

innovative fuels, and the advanced materials, without compromising the NRC's 

high safety standards. And we must do this quickly. 

For example, GA is developing a new methodology that we call Accelerated Fuel 

Qualification, or AFQTM for short, which we hope will help accelerate the licensing 

of advanced fuels. The idea is to leverage computer modeling and simulation to 

reduce the amount of data needed for licensing. 

Regardless of whether this methodology, or any other existing licensing path is 

implemented, early and sustained NRC involvement is key. Since I last appeared 

before this committee, I am pleased to see the recent NRC draft Project Plan for 

ATF. It recognizes that the past licensing path, which relies primarily on empirical 

data of fuel rod performance, cannot be the way of the future. 

Good progress on licensing has been made for "ncar-term" technologies, such as 

coated metal claddings. But, we also have to achieve the same progress for what 

are called the "longer-term" technologies: these are the more innovative 

technologies that will require different assessments and risk-informed, 

performance-based regulations. 

For example, a great benefit of the silicon carbide composite is the fact that it will 

withstand temperatures more than twice as high as those oftoday's metal 

claddings. Those claddings will fail at those higher temperatures, even if the metal 

is coated with materials that reduce hydrogen generation. 

But our silicon carbide cladding is a ceramic, not a metal, so this revolutionary 

technology will be delayed until the NRC develops technical acceptance criteria. 

Given the premature shutdowns of existing LWRs, there simply is no time to 

waste. The good news is that these "longer-term" technologies may be available 

only 2-3 years after the "ncar-term" ones if the NRC moves promptly on them. 

We welcome engagement with the NRC so we can assist them in fully 

understanding these materials quickly enough so they can develop their own 

validation plan for the modeling, and the data they will need, to license them in the 

most timely and safe fashion. 

We have been using technologies in the nuclear industry that are, in many cases, in 

excess of 60 years old. It is time we adopt new technologies, particularly from the 

materials sciences, not because they would be nice to have, but because they are 

needed for our industry's survival. It is particularly important for the NRC and the 
52 


32793.036

DOE to work closely together to introduce these new technologies into the 

marketplace. American industry also stands ready to cooperate with them. If we do 

this, we will find new ways to produce nuclear energy safely, cleanly and at much 

lower cost. 

We hope this Committee will use its oversight and legislative powers to ensure that 

the NRC can, and will, continue to design the new procedures it needs to facilitate 

the introduction of the new technologies required to support an ever more robust 

nuclear power industry. 

Please find the time to visit us in San Diego, I would be honored to give you a tour 

of our lab facilities. Seeing the actual fabrication in action will bring home to you 

a clear example of how ingenuity can transform the nuclear industry. 

Thank you for your interest and support. I would be happy to answer any 

questions. 
53 


32793.037

Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works 

Hearing entitled, "Advanced Nuclear Technology: Safety and Associated Benefits of 

Licensing Accident Tolerant Fuels for Commercial Nuclear Reactors" 

September 13, 2018 

Questions for the Record for Dr. Back 

Chairman Barrasso: 

l. The long-term development of General Atomics' nuclear fuel requires more modeling 

and simulation than near-term accident tolerant fuel designs. This is necessary 

to learn how the new material will react in a nuclear power plant. DOE's world-class 

modeling expertise will be critical to provide accurate data for NRC to use in the 

licensing process. 

What are the challenges and opportunities for NRC and DOE to collaborate on modeling 

and simulation? 

Response: 

GA's SiGATM ceramic nuclear fuel cladding provides an important opportunity to 

advance the U.S. nuclear energy program by combining our high-fidelity modeling 

capability and high-speed computing with our advanced experimental capabilities. 

The goal is to reduce the time and cost of inti·oducing exciting and essential new 

technologies into our aging nuclear programs, while maintaining or even improving 

safety. 

Currently, the NRC requires extensive empirical data to validate the safe performance of 

new materials. This effort entails lengthy, in-reactor irradiation experiments to collect 

data on thermal, chemicaL and radiation effects on the material in a reactor environment. 

For example, the process to make a relatively modest change from one metal alloy to 

another. Zircaloy to ZIRLO, took over I 0 years. 

In terms of cost, a single irradiation experiment to collect data for licensing can cost 

$1-5 Million. The total for licensing can easily reach over $100 Million when multiple 

experiments, in addition to the supporting personnel and facility infrastrocture, are taken 

into account. 

Qpporlllnity: Reduce licensing cost and schedule through the government's investment in 

high-fidelity modeling programs to simulate the performance of new materials in fuel 

rods and other core components. Programs such as DOE's NEAMS and high-speed 

computing, in particular the peta-scalc and the new ex a-scale systems, can simulate 

current light water reactor material interactions down to atomistic levels with much 

greater speed. Indeed. fuel performance codes can simulate 5-year long iJTadiation 

experiments, spanning the entire lifetime of a f11el rod, in just a few days of computer 

simulation. 

Page 1 of 5 
54 


32793.038

Challenge: Validate simulations with experimental data to ensure they have sufficient 

fidelity to predict fuel performance for licensing purposes. To reduce the cost and time of 

licensing we must take more advantage of simulations. Both the models and the 

computational algorithms in the simulations of fuel performance must be bcnchmarked 

with experimental data. 

Under the current methodology, it will likely take 15 to 20 years to experimentally 

demonstrate that improved materials are safe under reactor operating conditions. To 

achieve more efficient licensing, DOE should support an integrated program of 

simulation and experiments that verifies the underlying physics models atTecting fuel 

performance. In paralleL the NRC needs to establish standards to incorporate modeling: 

essentially, they need to determine acceptance criteria fbr the "data'' generated by 

simulations that are equivalent to data obtained through experiments. 

ln short, a methodology to demonstrate that new materials perform within acceptable 

bounds can, and must, be developed. With reliable simulations of fuel pcrforrnancc in 

reactors, the in-reactor experimental testing burden can be reduced without sacrificing 

safety. 

GA has taken an important step in this regard. We have teamed with the Oak Ridge 

National Laboratory and the University of Tennessee to develop the Accelerated Fuel 

Qualification (AFQn1

) methodology, which extrapolates the results of short-term microinadiations to full-scale component performance by high-fidelity modeling. This work is 

sponsored by DO E-NE under the U.S. Industry Opportunities for Advanced Nuclear 

Technology Development program. Under this program, the team will demonstrate the 

effectiveness of AFQ for the SiGA-clad fuel employed by GA's EM2 advanced reactor. 

Under this same program, DO E-NE has also funded an effort to engage the NRC to 

review the application of the AFQ methodology to substantially reduce long experimental 

fuel qualification times. The NRC has expressed enthusiasm for engaging in this program 

and has invited GA and the DOE to participate in the review of their in-house fuel 

performance computer simulation capabilities. GA views this collaboration as a 

significant step for our country to once again lead the world in the peaceful application of 

nuclear energy. 

To execute this vision, we need stable, well-funded, cost-share technology development 

and de-risking programs. This Committee's oversight of these efforts will be essential 

to ensure this happens. 

We think that funding efforts totaling about $30 Million in FYI9 for modeling could be 

raised to about $70 Million by FY21 specially since CASL funding of about $30 Million 

is slated to end after FY 19. Also, we suggest that the future modeling program 

solicitations be modified to include funding (perhaps an additional $25 Million. f(.lr a total 

of about $95 Million) for the experimental program required to validate the modeling. 

The desired result would be programs that would strongly couple the modeling to the 

experiments, which is what ultimately is required for success. 

Page 2 of 5 
55 


32793.039

We also need to attract the talented young scientists and programmers who can make this 

happen. Today, many of our most talented, young professionals do not see nuclear energy 

as an exciting career opportunity. This, we can and must change. 

Senator Duckworth: 

Illinois gets a significant amount of its energy from nuclear sources. Illinois' 11 reactors- the 

most of any state generate half of the state's electricity. 

These facilities are major job creators in my state and an important source of carbon-free energy. 

That is why I am deeply invested in ensuring that our existing nuclear fleet has the policies they 

need to thrive. 

2. What are your thoughts regarding accident tolerant fuels and their ability to help our 

existing reactors maintain operations? 

Response: 

The short answer is that ATF can help improve the economics and safety of 

operating existing reactors, and thus help keep them in service louger than 

otherwise. Therefore, it is important that DOE fund all of the ATF programs, 

including the neare1·-term as well as the longer-term more advanced options. 

The NRC categorized accident tolerant fuels (ATF) into two groups: near-term and longterm. The long-term group includes cladding, the fuel rod housing, that is made from 

ceramic silicon carbide material developed by GA called SiGA TM_ This material offers 

significant benefits over current, and near-term, cladding because it does not melt and is 

one of the hardest materials on earth. 

SiGA retains nearly full-strength and its overall geometrical shape at temperatures above 

l ROO degrees Celsius. By contrast, Zircaloy, the current metal cladding. significantly 

softens at 800 degrees Celsius and then balloons and fails. It has been predicted that 

SiGA would have survived the Three Mile Island accident and allowed the reactor to be 

recoverable. It also is expected to be able to survive most severe accident scenarios where 

near-term accident tolerant fuel solutions would fail. 

Under accident conditions such as those at Fukushima-Daiichi, SiGA is superior because 

its reaction rate with water is a thousand times slower than Zircaloy. The near-tcnn A TF 

claddings consist of Zircaloy with a thin metal coating, such as chromium. intended to 

retard the highly energetic reaction of Zircaloy with water that produced the hydrogen. 

Although the coating helps, it can be compromised or delaminate and does not 

substantially change the fundamental chemical or physical behavior of Zircaloy that we 

Page 3 of S 
56 


32793.040

saw at Fukushima. However, because coated Zircaloy may be available sooner than 

SIGA ATF, it merits continued suppor1. 

While the properties of silicon carbide have been known lor decades, the challenge has 

been in making it into various useful shapes. GA 's contributions include the technologies 

to make basic shapes such as plates and cylinders and to join them by a radiation resistant 

process. While this sounds simple, it is incredibly complex and is a major step forward in 

materials science. 

In addition, SiGA-based ATF can improve the economic performance of existing reactors 

in several ways. For one, it has superior nuclear properties over Zircaloy because it 

enables the reactor to use less fuel for the same power output. I! can also enable the fuel 

to burn for a longer period of time, thus reducing the t!·equency of plant outages tor 

refueling resulting in a greater number of operating days and thus more revenue. The fuel 

also has much larger safety margins, which could support a plant power uprate and could 

lessen the burden of some of the more expensive safety precautions. 

3. What are the main obstacles to deployment of accident tolerant fuels? 

Response: 

Both DO E-NE and the NRC understand the importance of ATF lor supporting the current 

tleet as well as for commercializing advanced reactors. Nevertheless, there are several 

obstacles that could impede progress toward implanting ATF. These include: 

I) Lack (!lavailahilitv i!/irradiation.fhcili!iesjiJr testing advanced ATFpro/oi>[JCS. The 

only facility tor testing integral fuel perfonnance of ATF in the U.S. is the Advanced 

Test Reactor (ATR) at the Idaho National Laboratory ( !NL). This facility is over 60 

years old and requires frequent maintenance, including a planned shutdown after the 

end of2019.lt is also principally used tor testing naval reactor fuel, with lower 

priority space for commercial fuel testing. There used to be one other option 

available, the !!alden Reactor in Norway, but this facility was recently closed by the 

Norwegian government. Thus, lack of irradiation test facilities in the U.S. is a serious 

impediment not only to ATF but to the future U.S. nuclear program in general. 

2) Insufficient support for a high:fidi!litv modeling ejliJrl that is henchmarked by 

experiments. As explained in the response to Chairman Barrasso's question, highfidelity modeling and high-speed computation have reached the point where computer 

simulations can supplant the need for extensive irradiation testing in reactors such as 

the ATR. As an example, GA 's Accelerated Fuel Qualification (AFQn1

) program, 

supported by DO E-NE, seeks to extrapolate the results of micro-irradiations to fullscale components by high-fidelity modeling in order to expedite fuel qualification and 

subsequent NRC licensing without compromising safety. These micro-irradiations 

can be done in smaller reactors like the lligh Flux Isotope Reactor (HFJR) at Oak 

Page 4 of 5 
57 


32793.041

Ridge National Laboratory. Although the funding is for a two-year exploratory 

program. we believe that an expanded program involving more participants, such as 

the materials group at Los Alamos National Laboratory and the Nuclear Energy 

Advanced Modeling and Simulation (NEAMS) program, can lead to expeditious and 

successful application of AFQ to aid in licensing. 

The current NEAMS funding is now approximately S30M, but $70M could be 

productively spent. especially since CASL funding will be ending after FY19. A special 

emphasis on new materials, not just neutronics, would accelerate adoption of innovative 

fi.1els. In addition, associated support for experimental benchmarking linked to 

simulations could be prioritized in future DOE awards. The NRC also could help more if 

its funding for these activities were increased by about SJO Million. 

Page 5 of 5 
58 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you for your testimony. There is an 

open invitation now to San Diego. Thank you. 

I appreciate the testimony from everyone. 

Mr. Furstenau, let me start with you. 

Hurricane Florence is rapidly approaching the southeastern 

United States. One of the news stories today showed a map of 

North Carolina where the nuclear power plants were by the coast. 

Will you update us now on how the NRC nuclear power plants 

and other NRC licensed facilities are preparing for the hurricane? 

Mr. FURSTENAU. Thank you for the question, Senator Barrasso. 

Based on available information, the impacts from the storm 

surge, winds, and flooding at Brunswick and other plants in Florence’s path will fall well below the plant design parameters. One 

reactor at Brunswick has started shutting down. Both Brunswick 

reactors are expected to be fully shut down hours before hurricane 

force winds could affect the site. 

All U.S. nuclear power plants have the additional resources like 

pumps, generators, and procedures required by the NRC after the 

Fukushima accident to maintain key safety functions during any 

severe event like this. Available information indicates that the 

plants can remain safe during the storm without the postFukushima equipment. 

NRC inspectors are at every U.S. operating power plant, following normal agency procedures. Additional inspectors have been 

dispatched to the plants in the storm’s path. The NRC will continue to observe the plants’ response in the storm and its aftermath. 

Senator BARRASSO. We appreciate that update. Thank you. It is 

very reassuring. 

Moving to the topic of discussion today, last year the Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission established an Accident Tolerant Fuel 

Steering Committee. The steering committee just issued the first 

version of a project plan for the licensing of the accident tolerant 

fuels. 

The plan serves as the strategic document for NRC and the private sector to make accident tolerant fuels commercially available. 

The plan includes multiple benchmarks and goals for timely action 

by the NRC staff. 

Do you believe the NRC can adhere to the scheduled outline in 

the steering committee’s plan, and will you commit to notifying the 

Committee if the NRC is unlikely to achieve its benchmarks? 

Mr. FURSTENAU. Mr. Chairman, the NRC is committed to that 

plan, and we do believe we can meet the milestones in that plan. 

Of course, it is a living document, and I think the other panel 

members would agree that if there are things that come up during 

the progress on the plan that need to be changed, we would do that 

with full and open participation of the stakeholders. 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you. 

Ms. Taylor, the Electric Power Research Institute is uniquely positioned as an independent, non-profit organization, to collaborate 

on accident tolerant fuel research. We appreciate that. 

Can you explain how your organization’s independence can give 

policymakers and the public greater confidence about the research 

59 

the NRC, the Department of Energy, and commercial fuel vendors 

are conducting on accident tolerant fuels? 

Ms. TAYLOR. Yes. An example of that would be the work we have 

done initially to assess the potential ATF concepts where we have 

used modeling capabilities we have to model how those fuels would 

perform during normal operation and during accident scenarios. 

That provides a base of information that is non-biased that people can use for decisionmaking. 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you. 

Mr. Williams, can you explain how the economic benefits of accident tolerant fuels could encourage utilities to renew licenses for 

existing nuclear reactors? 

Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir. As utilities reach the end of their operating license, they are beginning to evaluate whether or not to 

make the significant investment of whether or not we will renew 

our operating license. 

There are a number of factors involved. One is the cost of the energy that we will bring to the market and the available market for 

that. If ATF is able to provide the economic benefits it shows, then 

it makes our plants more effective and improves the business case 

by which we would make those decisions. 

Senator BARRASSO. Dr. Back, General Atomics is developing a 

particularly innovative accident tolerant fuel. I understand the new 

fuel would be suitable for today’s commercial light water reactors 

as well as tomorrow’s advanced reactors. 

Will you describe how this fuel differs from accident tolerant 

fuels that other commercial vendors are currently developing? 

Ms. BACK. Thank you. 

The material we are working with is actually something you 

could not have made 20 years ago. This is a ceramic, like your coffee mug, which is very good at retaining the fuel. In this particular 

case, because we have the fibers inside, it acts like rebar cement. 

That is what we call fracture-tough. 

Very important in these future scenarios to give added safety 

margins is it goes up to very high temperatures. In fact, this material does not melt. That is why the temperature difference is so 

vast between metals and ceramics. 

Also, it retains re-coolable geometry. This fuel, in an accident, 

would not breach in the same way that a metal would. Different 

metals have different behaviors than ceramics. These materials can 

increase the performance. 

Senator BARRASSO. Let me follow up with that, if I can, the difference between near-term and long-term. How is the NRC’s project 

plan addressing both, the near-term use of accident tolerant fuels 

as well as longer term proposals like those that General Atomics 

is developing? 

Ms. BACK. The plan has been very nice because it lays out by category, for instance, thermal hydraulics, burn up, and so on. The 

key difference, I think, is that for many of the near-term concepts, 

Zircaloy is still the metal cladding that is providing most of the 

function. There is a coating on top to, for instance, decrease the hydrogen generation. 

Fundamentally, that does not change the properties of the cladding to allow it to have a higher margin in safety. The fact is that 

60 

we go up to much higher temperatures, can have a coolable geometry, have orders of magnitude less in hydrogen generation, and 

the corrosion is much different. In Fukushima, there was an 

exothermic reaction, which is what caused the hydrogen production. That would not happen with this material. 

Those are the kinds of things that now require different fuel performance calculations because the material is fundamentally different. Those calculations have to be included in the regulations 

and taken into account. The full benefits will actually be seen 

there. 

Some of the early calculations now do not fully take into account 

some of these benefits. That is why there is a second generation of 

the EPRI report that will be coming up. I think those things will 

be reflected much better as we are able to incorporate these into 

the fuel performance calculations. 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you so very much, all of you. 

Senator Carper. 

Senator CARPER. When my sister and I were little kids growing 

up in Danville, Virginia, sometimes our family listened to the news 

on ABC radio, a guy named Paul Harvey. We were just little kids. 

When he finished the first part of his news, he would say, page 2 

and go on to the rest of the news, and finally, page 3. 

I want to ask you about page 2. There have to be some smart 

folks around this country who are looking at this technology, accident tolerant fuels, and also what Christina talked about over at 

her company, and they are saying that makes no sense, that is not 

very smart, that is not a good investment of taxpayer dollars. Why 

would we do that? 

I want to ask one or more of you to explain those arguments 

against going down this path and then rebut them. Lay out briefly 

the arguments against this technology and rebut them, one or more 

of you, please. I do not care who goes first. 

Ms. TAYLOR. I don’t know that I can fully address that question. 

However, one concern certainly is the ability to develop and license 

these quickly enough to make a difference in the existing reactor 

lifetime plants are currently licensed to. There is concern that can 

these be licensed quickly enough? 

Senator CARPER. Others, please? 

Mr. Williams. 

Mr. WILLIAMS. Another concern is that it is going to increase the 

cost of the fuel that we purchase for our plants as we deploy new 

technologies. That is why the safety, and therefore the economic 

benefits analysis, are important as we try to make the business 

case that this is in the best interest of our customers and results 

in an overall lower cost. 

Senator CARPER. Thanks. 

Ms. Back. 

Ms. BACK. I would like to point out that we are in a new world 

where materials are understood better. We can make parallel improvements, and calculations can be taken into account to really leverage the amount of data to help us understand the behavior of 

the fuel. 

61 

The concern is that it will take too long to incorporate these new 

materials. Really, the rebuttal is that if we do not do this, we will 

not be able to make cost competitive nuclear energy. 

We will not be able to take advantage of new engineering and 

science that has happened that, for instance, changes your phone 

from something that used to be a rotary dial that is now in 

everybody’s pocket, which is really a little computer. 

There are advantages in new technologies that are worth waiting 

for and worth investing in. In this case, because we can do parallel 

advances in the modeling, licensing, and technology, all of these 

can come together if we work well together. 

Senator CARPER. Thank you. 

Second, I want to address work force. 

I will start with you, Mr. Furstenau. 

The NRC will recruit the talent it needs to keep up with the new 

nuclear technology. What more could or should Congress do to help 

overcome any skill gaps you are aware of? 

Mr. FURSTENAU. Thank you for your question, Senator Carper. 

I think the work force planning is very important; how are we 

going to be ready for this in the future? I agree. 

At the NRC, we have been doing strategic work force planning 

exercises to adapt to that with an aging work force in our own 

agency and the outlook ahead for what may be coming down the 

line with accident tolerant fuel or other advanced reactor concepts. 

We need to recruit that talent. 

We are doing, like I said, strategic work force planning exercises. 

There is the Integrated University Program that NNSA, DOE, 

NRC, and Duke do complementary work on. Those types of activities are important to grow that work force in the future. 

Senator CARPER. Thank you, sir. 

Dr. Back, as someone who works for a company that is a client 

of the NRC, do you feel the agency has the necessary work force 

to review the new technologies that you described to us today or 

does more need to be done? 

Ms. BACK. I think it is a challenge, because the new material and 

new technologies require new learning, but there is a very eager 

and young group of engineers, nuclear engineers, and scientists 

that really do want to make a difference to clean energy. 

I think the work force is eager to try and engage and put together a licensing plan as well as develop the technology. The skills 

that are needed I think can be found as long as we work together 

to understand the material and to show the data. The NRC has to 

make their independent judgment of the data. 

We need to put together plans that take into account these different behaviors. I think those are challenging questions that the 

younger generation is eager to adopt and get involved with. I think 

there will be people who can fill those skill gaps. 

Senator CARPER. When I come back, I would like to ask some 

questions about Halden, the test reactor and how the U.S. Government is going to fill the gap when Halden is no longer an option. 

Thank you. 

Senator BARRASSO. Senator Whitehouse. 

Senator WHITEHOUSE. Thank you, Chairman. 

Welcome, all of you, and thank you for being here. 

62 

I am very interested in the prospect of advanced reactor concepts 

that hold the promise of being able to repurpose spent nuclear fuel. 

At present, we really do not have a plan for the spent nuclear fuel 

stockpiles. 

There are technologies emerging that would appear to be able 

to—and are, in some cases, asserted to be able to repurpose that 

stockpile and make some positive use of it. For instance, General 

Atomics has a design for an energy multiplier module that explores 

this potential. 

I am wondering if I could get your comments on how far we are 

in that direction and whether there are some early positive indicators about nuclear technologies that could repurpose existing nuclear waste stockpiles. 

Why don’t we go right across? 

Ms. BACK. Thank you for the question. 

The EM 2 Energy Multiplier Module is actually designed so that 

it can burn light water waste as well as its own waste. We really 

do not look at it as waste; we look at it as spent nuclear fuel. 

In the case of light water reactors, 95 percent of the material 

that is in the fuel rod is actually Uranium 238, which cannot burn. 

That is why you need an advanced reactor, in this case a fast reactor, so that you can burn that material. 

In that case, you can take a light water reactor core, do a process 

to remove the fission products, and then reform that fuel, and in 

a sense, recycle it. It is done with a process which is not the conventional reprocessing. It is a dry process. 

That process has been demonstrated. Canada and Korea have 

different aspects of it that have been successful. I think this can 

be incorporated so that we generate new fuel cores for EM 1 or 

some advanced reactor. It burns over its period of time, recycles, 

and over some 200 years, you can get rid of all of the geological 

waste that would be in the light water reactor spent fuel rod. 

Senator WHITEHOUSE. Mr. Williams, do you have anything to 

add? 

Mr. WILLIAMS. At Southern Nuclear, we are obviously paying attention to the advanced reactor technologies and staying abreast of 

the claims of those. At this time, we have not pursued any action 

there. 

Senator WHITEHOUSE. Ms. Taylor. 

Ms. TAYLOR. I cannot speak to any specific design, but I will say 

that in the advanced reactor space, similar to the accident tolerant 

fuel space, many companies are innovating with different approaches. It is an area where we see a lot of early career people 

contributing as well. 

Senator WHITEHOUSE. Mr. Furstenau. 

Mr. FURSTENAU. The NRC is open to review new and innovative 

designs as vendors prepare for that. 

Senator WHITEHOUSE. In the Committee, we have cleared the 

Nuclear Innovation and Modernization Act, which is now running 

hotlines for passage on the Senate floor. Senators Barrasso, Inhofe, 

Crapo, Booker, and myself are the original co-sponsors. 

Senator Crapo and I also have the Nuclear Energy Innovation 

Capabilities Act, which has passed the Senate by unanimous voice 

vote. 

63 

The first bill would reform the NRC licensing process to open it 

up to more technologies than the light water reactors. The second 

would help facilitate collaboration between the private sector and 

our National Labs toward the development of these technologies. 

We also just passed in the Senate a third bill that I did with Senators Crapo and Alexander that would allow and fund the Department of Energy to use spent Navy fuel for research in these advanced nuclear reactor technologies. 

Do you see those three measures as positive steps in freeing up 

the regulatory authority and the research capability to move forward in this space of potential reactors that could use our existing 

nuclear spent fuel stockpile as fuel, recycle, or reuse it? 

Start the other way with Mr. Furstenau first, and we will go 

across. 

Mr. FURSTENAU. Senator Whitehouse, I really cannot comment 

on pending legislation from an NRC standpoint. 

Senator WHITEHOUSE. Fair enough. 

Ms. TAYLOR. We are seeing some very positive results with the 

innovative companies working together with the National Lab capabilities to move a lot of technologies forward. 

Senator WHITEHOUSE. I think actually we are seeing kind of a 

signal response thing. The National Labs have stepped forward 

more. Seeing this legislation going forward and seeing its support, 

they are actually a bit ahead of the actual bill, which is a good 

thing. It is a good signal response. 

Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir, absolutely. Southern Nuclear believes 

that any legislation that promotes innovation in nuclear is a positive thing and will benefit the industry overall. 

Ms. BACK. I absolutely think it helps because by nature, nuclear 

energy needs to be conservative because we need to be safe, and 

we want to keep the gold standard of the NRC. 

That means that we have to change the regulations and the ways 

we assess materials and develop the processes to meet the need of 

bringing in new technologies. That means looking at how we characterize the materials, developing new regulations, which are not 

now based on a deterministic measurement over 30 years of data. 

We have power in the computing codes that has been brought to 

every other area. For instance, in developing your cars and planes, 

all of those use modeling and simulations. This is something where 

I think the regulations need to be accelerated and changed. I think 

the legislation helps encourage cooperation among the National 

Labs, the utilities, NRC, and all of us. All of that is absolutely necessary for it to go forward. 

Senator WHITEHOUSE. Thank you, Chairman. Again, thank you 

for your support on these pieces of legislation. 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you for your leadership as well. It has 

been a good, cooperative effort. 

Senator Carper, we were talking about what happened with the 

Halden test reactor. I am going to ask a couple questions, and I 

know you have a couple as well. I am going to start with Ms. Taylor. 

In June the organization overseeing the Halden test reactor in 

Norway announced it would permanently close the reactor. The reVerDate Aug 31 2005 06:39 Nov 21, 2018 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\_EPW\DOCS\32793.TXT SONYA
64 

actor would have provided critical scientific data necessary for licensing of accident tolerant fuels. 

In July the Electric Power Research Institute participated in a 

Department of Energy workshop at the Idaho National Lab. The 

workshop assessed how to fill the gaps in testing capacity that closure of the Halden reactor has left behind. 

Could you talk about what the primary gaps in testing capacity 

were that were identified, and what can we do to fill the gaps? 

Ms. TAYLOR. I can address that to some extent. 

The Halden test reactor project is more than just a facility. It is 

a facility that had been a multinational collaboration to fund and 

plan testing. The reactor had some unique capabilities, two of 

which were the ability to test the large number of specimens in 

parallel, so it was very large for a test reactor. It also had some 

looped capabilities. 

Many of the stakeholders have come together. You mentioned the 

July workshop. Idaho National Lab was the place to kind of convene what the need was. A game plan has been laid out to provide 

many of those capabilities through additional capabilities at Idaho. 

Senator BARRASSO. Are there policies perhaps that the Department of Energy, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, or even Congress should consider to try to fill some of these testing gaps, or 

do you think we will be OK as we are heading? 

Ms. TAYLOR. I cannot really address the policy issues. 

Senator BARRASSO. OK. 

Mr. Furstenau, what steps is the NRC taking to ensure that the 

Halden closure does not really slow the progress on licensing the 

accidental tolerant fuels? 

Mr. FURSTENAU. At the NRC, we also participated in the workshops at the Idaho National Lab. At this point, we think there is 

no significant impact on the current test plans as we know. I am 

confident that the Department of Energy, the capabilities at the 

DOE sites, and possibly the universities will really fill that gap in 

the longer term. 

Senator BARRASSO. By history, before joining the NRC in your 

current position, you spent years at the Department of Energy, so 

you have a pretty good understanding of what the capacities are. 

You feel they are going to be able to fill this? 

Mr. FURSTENAU. Yes, sir. 

Senator BARASSO. OK. Thank you. 

Senator Carper, do you have additional questions? 

Senator CARPER. I do have a few. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. 

Again, thanks very much for being with us today. 

Mr. Williams, 10 or so years ago, we were talking about at least 

25 brand new light water reactors being built in this country. Do 

you remember that? I do. 

Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes. 

Senator CARPER. All were expected to come online maybe this 

year or soon thereafter. In reality, our Nation is only building now, 

as we know, two new light water reactors. Those two are being 

built in Georgia by your company. 

The effect of the Westinghouse bankruptcy on the nuclear industry is troubling for us, and I am sure for you and others. Can you 

take a moment and tell us how are things going at Vogtle and what 

65 

are some of the lessons learned that might help the next generation of nuclear power? 

Mr. WILLIAMS. Senator, I appreciate your question. 

Unfortunately, in my role, I focus on our operating fleet of reactors and am not aware of all of the issues associated with the 

project. We would be happy to respond to your question in writing. 

Senator CARPER. Does anyone have any insights briefly in this 

regard? I think it is a pretty good question, better than most of my 

questions. Does anyone else have any insight you would like to 

share? 

[All respond in the negative.] 

Senator CARPER. A response for the record from Mr. Williams, 

but others would be welcomed. 

Mr. Furstenau, with respect to NRC planning for accident tolerant fuels, the NRC’s draft plan on accident tolerant fuels states, I 

believe, that the agency will use applicant provided data or DOE 

data to determine the safety of a concept and that the agency will 

not perform its own independent testing. 

Would you elaborate on this point? Does the NRC do this in 

other circumstances? Why does it now make sense to do it for accident tolerant fuels? 

Mr. FURSTENAU. Senator, you are correct about the project, the 

current plan does not. The assumption is being made that we will 

not do our own confirmatory testing. However, in the testing programs that are developed by the vendors and industry, we will use 

data that comes out of that testing program and independently look 

at that and review it from a confirmatory analysis standpoint. 

However, at this point in time, we do not see a need for additional confirmatory testing on these near-term concepts. 

Senator CARPER. Thank you. 

Dr. Back, back to you. As I mentioned in my statement, extreme 

weather events are expected to be more frequent and more extreme 

due to climate change. Already nuclear power has proven to be 

quite resilient in this country during these extreme weather events. 

We are going to be closely watching and be in close step with the 

NRC to make sure that is the case during Florence. 

Would you like to take a moment and discuss how the technologies your company is developing will allow nuclear power to be 

even more resilient and safe during extreme weather events like 

Florence and those that follow? 

Ms. BACK. Yes. Thank you. 

As you know, nuclear power performed very well during the Harvey event. There are already advantages in nuclear energy, for instance, of having all the fuel onsite. You do not have pipelines or 

electricity lines. 

For the advanced reactor, there has been a lot of thought along 

making them more resilient. One, in particular, is the EM 2 that we 

envision is a smaller, more compact reactor. Importantly, it is underground so there is protection from things like Florence. 

There are passively safe systems and built in redundancies that 

are consistent with what are typical NRC regulations so that we 

make sure it is safe in case of loss of power. For instance, there 

is an important way that the power conversion unit works with 

66 

cooling and kicks in with natural convection, if that does not pan 

out, if there is total loss of electricity. 

All of those aspects are thought through and incorporated into 

the reactor as well as the other efficiencies to be able to run the 

fuel at higher utilization so that you actually do not need to access 

the core for 30 years. 

Senator CARPER. Thank you. I have one more. 

This is kind of a wrap up question. I am going to ask each of you 

on the panel to respond to this question if you would. 

Mr. Furstenau, if you would go first. 

If you had one piece of parting advice to give to us on the Environment and Public Works Committee with respect to advanced 

nuclear fuels, what would be that advice? 

Mr. FURSTENAU. I think, in my opinion, it would be we all need 

to be open and adaptive to enabling new technologies like ATF and 

advanced reactor concepts that have the potential to make nuclear 

power even safer. 

Senator CARPER. Thank you. 

Ms. Taylor. 

Ms. TAYLOR. I agree. Continuing to encourage innovation in this 

space which has not always been innovative is yielding new options. 

Senator CARPER. How should we express that encouragement? 

Ms. TAYLOR. I do not have any suggestions. 

Senator CARPER. Really? All right. 

Mr. Williams. 

Mr. WILLIAMS. I think the way to encourage it is to encourage 

the collaboration between industry and public-private partnerships 

working together. This is a great example of collaboration between 

the Department of Energy, the fuel vendors, the utilities, and the 

Electric Power Research Institute to rapidly advance an innovation 

to deployment. 

Senator CARPER. Thank you. 

Dr. Back. 

Ms. BACK. My overriding concern is that we need to have data, 

and that means irradiations, something like the advanced test reactor at Idaho National Lab and as you were asking about in 

Halden. 

Those are expensive and need to be done well and be instrumented so that we get the maximum amount of data so we can 

push forward and make sure we have all the information needed 

to make sure these materials are safe and perform as they behave. 

We need a prioritization and maybe another look at what we can 

do to make more opportunities available for irradiation testing. 

Senator CARPER. Let me ask, very briefly, would the other panelists respond to what Dr. Back just said? 

Mr. FURSTENAU. I think her point on needing irradiation test 

data when you then use modeling and simulation codes, you need 

to have data to verify those models and codes. I think especially for 

the concepts like General Atomics referred to, you do need some of 

that material that has not been used before. You need that test 

data to help validate it. It also helps with the licensing process as 

well as the safety case for the licensees. 

67 

Senator CARPER. Any other comment in response to what she 

said? 

Ms. TAYLOR. Just to understand how the fuel behaves in the 

whole system of the plant, that data is needed to properly model 

the behavior that you would expect. 

Senator CARPER. Mr. Williams, anything? 

Mr. WILLIAMS. No. 

Senator CARPER. This has been timely and helpful. As the storm 

bears down, this reminds us all the more that extreme weather has 

been coming our way for some time, and it ain’t going to stop. We 

have to figure out how to respond to it, not to just address the 

symptoms of the problem but also the root cause of the problems 

creating all this bad weather for our country and our world. This 

could be part of the solution, not the whole solution but part of the 

solution. We welcome your input today. 

Thank you so much. 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you, Senator Carper, and Senator 

Whitehouse as well. 

Thank all of you for being here to testify. Other members may 

want to submit follow up questions for the record. The hearing 

record will be open for 2 weeks. 

I want to thank you all for being here, for your time, and your 

testimony. 

This hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:15 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 

Æ