1. Small Modular Reactor Update
Energy Innovations Summit
12 September 2016
Small Modular Reactor Update

2. Introductions Bruce Landrey - Landrey & Company Ted Rampton – UAMPS
40 years in the nuclear industry
Held executive positions at Portland General Electric and the Tennessee Valley Authority
Helped launch NuScale Power in January Led International Marketing, Government Affairs, Strategic Planning.
Now advise nuclear companies on business strategy and technology commercialization.
Clients include the U.S. Department of Energy, Sandia National Laboratory, Studsvik, and Energy Northwest.
 Ted Rampton – UAMPS
Chief Governmental Affairs Officer of Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems
Represents 45 municipal electric utilities in Utah, New Mexico, Nevada, California Oregon, Wyoming and Idaho.
Designated lead for the Carbon Free Power Project, consisting of energy efficiency, rooftop solar and small modular reactor technology for the UAMPS membership.
Involved with issues surrounding Colorado River since 1976 and actively following the Grand Canyon Studies since 1989.
From 2009 to 2012, Mr. Rampton was designated a member of the board of directors of the American Public Power Association
Graduated from Weber State University, and is an honor graduate with distinction from Brigham Young University's Masters of Public Administration Program.

3. Introductions Marc Nichol – Nuclear Energy Institute
Worked for Duke Energy, Toshiba America Nuclear Energy and Transnuclear, in the areas of used nuclear fuel management, operations and new plant projects.
Joined the Nuclear Energy Institute in 2011
Senior project manager in new plant licensing. In this role, he l
Leads industry’s efforts to resolve generic regulatory issues related to small modular reactors.
Holds degrees in Nuclear Engineering from Purdue University and the University of California Berkeley, and an MBA from the University of North Carolina

4. Nuclear In The World Today

5. Reactors Under Construction

6. Nuclear Power Plants in the USA6

7. Nuclear Power Plants - Global7

8. U.S. Near-Term SMR Technologies

9. SMR Overview Characteristics Key factors for commercialization
300 MWe or less
Factory-fabricated
Modular / Scalable
Major components transportable
by truck, rail or barge
Passive safety systems
Key factors for commercialization
Financing development and commercialization
Developing, testing materials, fuels, fabrication techniques
Securing NRC / other approvals, regulatory issues
SMR Licensing Technical Support Program

10. SMR Benefits
Modularity: factory fabrication & shipping of major components
Lower total capital investment: time & expenditure to commercial operation less than for large nuclear plants
Siting flexibility: smaller markets, isolated areas, smaller grids, limited water & acreage
Efficiency: couple with other sources (renewables and fossil) to leverage resources and increase efficiency
Enhanced safety and security: potential synergy between AFSPC and SMR operations, decreased vulnerability

11. U.S. SMR Technology Comparison
BWXT mPower
Holtec
NuScale
Westinghouse
MWe
195
160 50
225
Units per Plant 2
1 – 2 12 1
Total MWe
390
320
600
Refueling
24 months
Design Life
60 years
Site
<40 acres
5 – 7.5 acres
40 acres
15 acres
Overnight Cost / kw NA
$4,062
$5,078

12. Current Incentives for New Nuclear
Energy Policy Act of 2005
Risk Insurance
Loan Guarantees
Production Tax Credits
First 6,000 MWe of new nuclear
$18 MWh for eight years
Up to $125 million / year per plant
File COLA with NRC by 2008
Pour safety related concrete by 2014
Commercial operation by 12/31/2021
Efforts underway to extend the dates

13. Support for New Nuclear
USDOE Licensing Technical Support Program – 50/50 cost share
mPower NRC Design Certification Application (on hold)
NuScale – NRC Design Certification Application (Dec. 2016)
TVA – NRC Early Site Permit Application (May 2016)
UAMPS – NRC Construction & Operating License Application
Program ends in FY17
USDOE evaluating next steps for FY18 and beyond
Bipartisan and bicameral support in the House and Senate for new nuclear and SMRs
Washington State – two SMR studies
New Mexico – SMR study underway
Wisconsin – rescinded ban on new nuclear

14. Colorado and SMRs
USDOE funded study on using SMRs to provide clean, secure energy to DoD installations. Completed March 2016.
Case study on Schriever AFB, Colorado Springs, CO, and Clear AFS, Fairbanks, AK.
Findings:
No impediments to using SMRs to serve DoD installations
Synergies exist between DoD installations and SMR operations
Near-term SMRs produce more energy than needed by a single DoD installation
Needs of multiple DoD installations can be aggregated to more fully use the output from an SMR – e.g., In Colorado: Schriever, Peterson, Fort Carson, Cheyenne Mountain, and Buckley.

15. Bruce Landrey Landrey & Company, Inc. 503-715-7900 brucel@landreyco
Bruce Landrey Landrey & Company, Inc