Slide 1Doc.ppt0144

NEW NUCLEAR POWER

Ed Cummins

Westinghouse Electric Company

June 29, 2006

Slide 2Doc.ppt0144

A Nuclear Renaissance is Beginning

Major Driving Factor

- Price of natural gas more than doubled.

- Volatility of natural gas prices

- High long-term projections for natural gas prices Additional Considerations

– Energy security

– Uncertainty in the future emissions regulations (monetization of airborne pollutants such as carbon and mercury)

– Availability of advanced nuclear plant designs– Relative stability of regulatory environment– Public policy (political) support (Energy Legislation in the U.S.)

Challenges- Spent fuel disposal- Resource availability (human and supply chain)- Project Management

Slide 3Doc.ppt0144

New Plant Licensing Process

New NRC Licensing Process

　　

Slide 4Doc.ppt0144

AP1000 Design Certification Received From NRC 12/30/05

Slide 5Doc.ppt0144

U.S. Government Support

“To build a secure energy future, we need to expand production of safe, clean nuclear power.”

President George W. Bush

Slide 6Doc.ppt0144

New Plant Licensing Process Early Site Permit

- ESP is a partial construction permit .

- ESP addresses site safety issues, environmental protection

issues and plans for coping with emergencies.

- Independent of the review of a specific nuclear plant design

- Three ESP applications submitted in 2003 (Dominion,

Exelon and Entergy).

- Southern Company has scheduled an ESP application

in August 2006.

　　

Slide 7Doc.ppt0144

New Plant Licensing Process Cont’d.

Combined License (COL) - COL authorizes construction and conditional

operation of a nuclear power plant. - COL application should include information required for

a construction permit and operating license. - Must include the proposed inspections, tests and

analyses which the licensee shall perform and associated acceptance

criteria (ITAAC) .

- The NRC must also find that the ITAAC have been met before

granting authorization to operate.

Slide 8Doc.ppt0144

Nuclear Power 2010 Dominion pursuing COL for ESBWR at North Anna. NuStart Project Status

- Two sites selected for COL Application - Bellefonte (TVA) for AP1000 and Grand Gulf (Entergy) for ESBWR.

- GE filed an application for design certification of ESBWR in August 25, 2005.

- Design certification of AP1000 was issued in December 2005 .

- Engineering work needed for COL applications under way.

Submit COLs in the fourth quarter 2007. Obtain COL license in 2010. Plant operation 2015.

Slide 9Doc.ppt0144

United States New Plant Market Status

Commitments for COL License

AP1000NuStart (TVA) 2 unitsDuke 2 unitsProgress 2 units North CarolinaProgress 2 units FloridaSCANA 2 unitsSouthern 2 units

12 unitsESBWR

Dominion 2 unitsEntergy 2 units

4 unitsEPR

Constellation 1-2 units

ABWRSouth Texas 2 units

Power Companies Evaluating Technology Florida Power and Light AMEREN UE Texas Utilities

Strong preference for passive plants Preference for design and licensing maturity of AP1000

Slide 10Doc.ppt0144

2005 Energy Policy Act

President Bush signed the comprehensive energy bill into law, called 2005 Energy Policy Act. on August 8, 2005.

Nuclear Related Provisions

- Federal risk insurance that would pay up to $2B if there

are delays in full power operations of the first six

advanced power reactors receiving NRC’s new combined

construction and operating licenses. This covers

100% of the cost of delay for the first two new plants, up to

$500M each, and 50% of the delay costs up to $250M

each for plants three to six.

Slide 11Doc.ppt0144

2005 Energy Policy Act Cont’d. Nuclear Related Provisions (continued)

- Federal loan guarantee of up to 80% of the project cost.

- Production tax credit for new reactors of 1.8 cents per kilowatts-hour for nuclear generated electricity over eight years. Implementing rules share benefits among qualifying new plant projects.

- All decommissioning funds are taxed at 20% rate (reduced from the current rate).

- Extension of Price-Anderson Act through 2025 (accident insurance).

Slide 12Doc.ppt0144

AP1000 Schedule to Commercial Operation

Q 3 Q 4 Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4201420132004 2009 2010 2011 20122005 2006 2007 2008

Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 420162015

COL Engineering

Early Procurement Activities

Pre-Construction Site Activities

Construction

Startup

FOAK Design Details

AP1000 DC

Commercial

Operation

COL Issued

Place Order

Submit COL

FDA

Slide 13Doc.ppt0144

Westinghouse developed AP600, its first passive safety reactor

　 system in the early 1990s (1,300 man-years of design and testing). NRC issued AP600 design certification in 1999 following extensive

licensing review of more than 130 man-years and independent

confirmatory testing of critical systems. Westinghouse embarked on AP1000 development to improve cost

competitiveness. Half billion dollars and over 15 years invested in the development

of passive technology.

Westinghouse Fifteen Year Investment in Passive Technology

Slide 14Doc.ppt0144

AP1000: No Technology Risk

AP1000 power generation systems (fuel, NSSS, turbine generator, support systems) are of “traditional design” and involve no new or novel technology. Operating experience is directly applicable.

“Passive” safety systems are, in general, very simple consisting largely of tanks, pipes and a few air or DC operated valves.

Expected performance under accident conditions validated by extensive testing (>$40 MUSD) and regulatory review.

Modular construction techniques well proven in non-nuclear applications (ship building, off-shore drilling platforms)

Mature in design and licensing – 60% complete

Slide 15Doc.ppt0144

AP1000Design Features

Slide 16Doc.ppt0144

The Westinghouse AP1000

A compact station• 3415 MWt. Primary system•1117 MWe•2-loops, 2 steam generators

Slide 17Doc.ppt0144

AP1000/AP600Reactor Coolant System

Slide 18Doc.ppt0144

AP1000 Turbine-Generator

Slide 19Doc.ppt0144

AP1000 Provides Safety and Investment Protection

1 x 10-4 (a) 5 x 10-5 1 x 10-5 (a) 5.1 x 10-7 (a)

Core Damage Frequency per Year

U. S. NRCRequirements

CurrentPlants

US UtilityRequirements

AP1000Results

Note (a) CDF includes random and internal hazard events from at-power and shutdown conditions.

Slide 20Doc.ppt0144

AP1000 Simplifications Safety

– Use of passive safety systems Design

– Reduced number of components and bulk commodities Procurement

– Standardization of components Construction

– Extensive use of modules reduces on-site construction– Multiplexed I&C communication reduces cables

Operation and Maintenance– Use of proven systems and components– Man-machine interface advancements

Slide 21Doc.ppt0144

Passive Safety – What is it all about?

Passive Safety Systems utilizes naturally occurring physical phenomena such as natural circulation of air, water and steam.

Gravity and gas pressure drive the flow of cooling water.

Natural heat transfer occurs through conduction, convection and evaporation.

Flow and cooling occur in accordance with nature’s laws – There are no pumps and motor-operated valves.

A few valves align the passive safety systems upon actuation signals.

Greatly reduced operator dependency

AC electrical power is not required for plant safety.

Slide 22Doc.ppt0144

The AP1000 is Smaller and Dramatically Simpler than Evolutionary Plants

74147A

Sizewell B AP1000

Slide 23Doc.ppt0144

Standardization

Standardization has been a key element of New Plant Commercialization for 20 years – NPOC Strategic Plan.

The Utility Requirements Document standardized the Power Company requirements for New Plants.

Design Certification commits the Plant Supplier and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to a “Standard Plant”.

NRC approach to Design Centered Combined Construction and Operating License (COL) enhances standardization.

NRC will “punish” departure from Design Centered review with “extended” licensing schedule.

Economics provide incentives for Standardization Beyond Design:

– Operations - Supply Chain– Engineering - Maintenance

Slide 24Doc.ppt0144

Standard Plant Design Scope Since the start of the AP600 program, Westinghouse has

maximized the scope of the Standard Plant:

– Forced Draft Cooling Tower for non-safety related Essential Service Water System

– Spring Mounted Turbine Table Top is not sensitive to Site Soil Conditions.

– Use of Broad Set of Environmental interface criteria established by the URD (snow, rain, temperatures, wind, soil conditions)’

Standard Plant is described in AP1000 Design Control Document, Chapter 1.2.

The Scope of Standardization includes the entire plant. Passive Plant Standardization is enhanced by:

– No need for Safety Related AC Power

– No need for Safety Related Ultimate Heat Sink (Intake Structure)

Slide 25Doc.ppt0144

Standard Plant Market ApproachReduced risk to both buyers

and sellers

Lower power generation cost

Shorter construction schedules

Enhanced public confidence

Smoother regulatory review

Improved perception/

acceptance of financial markets

Slide 26Doc.ppt0144

Impact of New Nuclear Plants on Wholesale

Electricity Costs

Slide 27Doc.ppt0144

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Year

Pro

du

ctio

n C

ost

(2

00

5 c

en

ts/k

wh

)

Nuclear 1.72

Coal 2.21

Gas 7.51

Oil 8.09

Source: Global Energy DecisionsUpdated: 6/06

Production Costs = Operations and Maintenance Costs + Fuel Costs

U.S. Electricity Production Costs

Slide 28Doc.ppt0144

.

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005

Year

Gas

Pri

ce ($

/MM

Btu

)

Source: DOE/EIA – Electric Power Monthly

Natural Gas PriceU.S. Electric Generation

Slide 29Doc.ppt0144

80%

35%12%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Nuclear Coal NGCC

Co

st P

rop

ort

ion

O&MFuelCapital

Generation Fuel Cost

Slide 30Doc.ppt0144

68%

50%

14%0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Nuclear Coal NGCC

Co

st

Pro

po

rtio

n

O&M

Fuel

Capital

Generation Capital Cost

Slide 31Doc.ppt0144

Electricity Regulatory EnvironmentNuclear plants can be implemented in either

regulated or unregulated electricity markets.

All power companies committed to obtaining AP1000 COL licenses operate in regulated markets (Southern, Duke, Progress, SCANA).

In regulated markets, the plant owner obtains a predetermined regulated return on investment. The price of electricity is set by the regulator to achieve this return.

Regulators evaluate and approve generating capacity additions based on consideration of (cost, fuel diversity, fuel volatility and security of supply).

Slide 32Doc.ppt0144

Electricity Regulatory Environment-Cont’d.

New nuclear plants have been proposed in unregulated markets (Dominion and Constellation).

Market based owners of nuclear plants sell electricity at the “market price” and obtain a return on investment based on the difference between market price and the production costs.

Uncertainty in market price leads unregulated power companies to seek long-term power purchase contracts.

Slide 33Doc.ppt0144

Electricity Pricing Under Regulation Is Based On Recovering Utility Revenue Requirements

Electricity Price =Revenue Requirements / Electricity Generation (kwh)

Revenue Requirements =Operating Costs + Rate Base x Allowed Rate of Return

Operating Costs =O&M + Fuel + Depreciation & Amort. + Taxes + Fees + Accruals

Rate Base =Gross Investment - Accumulated Depreciation

Allowed Rate of Return =Value Determined by State or Federal Regulatory Commissions

•The price of electricity is established by the regulator to provide generating plant owners on agreed return.•New nuclear plants are approved if the expected cost of electricity is less than for alternate generating sources “Least Cost Plan”.

Slide 34Doc.ppt0144

Deregulated Market Pricing Example:Plants are Dispatched in Order of Bid Price

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000

Cumulative System Capacity (MWe)

En

erg

y P

rice

($/

mw

h) Plant Bid Price

Each Plant Assumed to be 1,000 MWe

Slide 35Doc.ppt0144

Deregulated Market Pricing Example: At a 5,000 Mwe Demand Level All Plants Operating Receive $15/mwh

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000

Cumulative System Capacity (MWe)

En

erg

y P

rice

($/

mw

h)

Contribution to Fixed Cost& Profit

Plant Bid Price

Each Plant Assumed to be 1,000 MWe

Marginal PlantMarket Clearing Price

Slide 36Doc.ppt0144

Load Duration CurveNERC Regions

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%

Percent of Hours > Load Value

Per

cent

of P

eak

Load

ERCOT

FRCC

NEPOOL

The Demand for Electricity Is Driven by the Shape of the Load Duration Curve for Each of the Regions

Slide 37Doc.ppt0144

Analyzing 2006 Wholesale Electricity Costs in New England

2006 Regional System Plan (RSP06) estimated how certain actions can affect costs

RSP06 will model a number of scenarios to determine their effect on prices, including:

– Addition of a 1,000 MW base load resource

– Addition of a 1,000 MW clean-coal generator

– 5% load growth without generation addition Nuclear base loads impact is similar to coal. A low

cost generator is added to the generation mix. Owners return is based on integrated difference in

market price and generating cost.

Change in wholesale price-5.7%

-5.6%

5.8%

Slide 38Doc.ppt0144

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Nuclear Coal -Low

Coal -High

NGCC -Low

NGCC -High

Lev

eliz

ed C

ost

($/

mw

h)

O&MFuelCapital

$2,400-3,200/kwe Breakeven with NGCC

$1,800-2,300/kwe Breakeven with Coal

Nuclear Breakeven Capital Cost

Slide 39Doc.ppt0144

Market Based Nuclear GenerationDispatching Resources

ISO uses least expensive mix of resources to meet minute-to-minute power needs of the region.

– Impact of additional units depends on size of ISO and characteristics of electric load.

Most expensive needed resource sets market clearing price for all (Uniform Clearing Price Auction).

– Sends a clear signal to investors and the region on what resources should be developed.

– Responds immediately to changed market conditions.

– Encourages marginal-cost based offers so that the most efficient units are dispatched.

Marginal cost for nuclear fuel cost $5.0/MWK

O&M costs are treated as fixed at about $10.0 MWH.

Return on capital is dependent on cost of plant and capacity factor.

Slide 40Doc.ppt0144

Summary

The current resurgence of interest in nuclear power in the U.S. is based on several factors:

– Need for additional base load generation in the 2010-2015 period

– High price of natural gas makes nuclear plants the lowest cost generation source.

– Uncertainty in Environmental Legislation (carbon, mercury, other pollutants) results in reluctance to build coal plants.

– Concern about carbon emissions is expected to result in carbon taxes or emission free incentives.

Slide 41Doc.ppt0144

Summary – Cont’d.

The Energy Act of 2005 provides very attractive incentives for the first few nuclear plants.

The AP1000 is attractive as the only advanced plant that has completed Design Certification.

Prediction: There will be AP1000 plants operating in the U.S. by 2015.