3 ms·

I think there were issues in the initial 2016 proposal, some were corrected in the subsequent proposals. Just the fact that it has taken some 12000 page applica

I think there were issues in the initial 2016 proposal, some were corrected in the subsequent proposals. Just the fact that it has taken some 12000 page application and we're in the 7th year of this process tells you what you need to know. The entire industry is fucked and the only the way to move forward to abolish NRC, start a new agency that resembles AEC from 1940-1970. Perhaps the next president will.

credit_guy 4y ago
12000 pages for an approval for a new nuclear reactor design is not a lot. First of all, here's my source for the 12k number [1]: NuScale spent over $500 million, with the backing of Fluor, and over 2 million labor hours to develop the information needed to prepare its DCA application. The company also submitted 14 separate Topical Reports in addition to the over 12,000 pages for its DCA application and provided more than 2 million pages of supporting information for NRC audits. Here's the link [2] for the 14 Topical Reports, and the link [3] with the documents for the DCA (design certification application). I personally perused some of those documents, and I didn't get the impression that they show just busywork. They seem to be (in my non-expert opinion) quite commensurate with the complexity of the project. I for one am happy that the NRC is showing a lot of diligence when working on approving a new nuclear reactor. And by the way, I used to be in the same camp: nuclear plants are very expensive because the NRC makes it so. But going through the rabbit hole of the NRC approval documents showed me that's not the case. Here's an anecdote. I can't find a link now, but I'm sure with a bit of effort we could find it. At some point during the NuScale process, one of the reviewers raised his concerns about some phenomenon around how Boron mixes with water in some edge case. Eventually the issue got resolved, apparently, since the design was approved. But the concern was highly technical, and I can only imagine NuScale spent a lot of time trying to address it. I'm sure there were thousands of cases like that. Is it possible that the NRC is overly cautious? Maybe, but I didn't get a sense they are gratuitously cautious. I just got the sense they are just doing their job, and they are thorough about it. And I like that. [1] https://www.nuscalepower.com/newsletter/nucleus-fall-2020/program-development-update https://www.nuscalepower.com/newsletter/nucleus-fall-2020/pr... [2] https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML2019/ML20197A370.html https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML2019/ML20197A370.html [3] https://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-reactors/smr/licensing-activities/nuscale/documents.html#dcApp https://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-reactors/smr/licensing-acti...

credit_guy 4y ago

12000 pages for an approval for a new nuclear reactor design is not a lot. First of all, here's my source for the 12k number [1]: NuScale spent over $500 million, with the backing of Fluor, and over 2 million labor hours to develop the information needed to prepare its DCA application. The company also submitted 14 separate Topical Reports in addition to the over 12,000 pages for its DCA application and provided more than 2 million pages of supporting information for NRC audits. Here's the link [2] for the 14 Topical Reports, and the link [3] with the documents for the DCA (design certification application). I personally perused some of those documents, and I didn't get the impression that they show just busywork. They seem to be (in my non-expert opinion) quite commensurate with the complexity of the project. I for one am happy that the NRC is showing a lot of diligence when working on approving a new nuclear reactor. And by the way, I used to be in the same camp: nuclear plants are very expensive because the NRC makes it so. But going through the rabbit hole of the NRC approval documents showed me that's not the case. Here's an anecdote. I can't find a link now, but I'm sure with a bit of effort we could find it. At some point during the NuScale process, one of the reviewers raised his concerns about some phenomenon around how Boron mixes with water in some edge case. Eventually the issue got resolved, apparently, since the design was approved. But the concern was highly technical, and I can only imagine NuScale spent a lot of time trying to address it. I'm sure there were thousands of cases like that. Is it possible that the NRC is overly cautious? Maybe, but I didn't get a sense they are gratuitously cautious. I just got the sense they are just doing their job, and they are thorough about it. And I like that. [1] https://www.nuscalepower.com/newsletter/nucleus-fall-2020/program-development-update https://www.nuscalepower.com/newsletter/nucleus-fall-2020/pr... [2] https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML2019/ML20197A370.html https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML2019/ML20197A370.html [3] https://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-reactors/smr/licensing-activities/nuscale/documents.html#dcApp https://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-reactors/smr/licensing-acti...