Reference, Questions and Help > Nuke Q&A

The 'Nuclear Promise'

(1/2) > >>

As part of the Nuclear Promise initiative, the industry will analyze cost drivers common to all nuclear power plants and recommend programs and processes to improve their efficiency and effectiveness. The goal is to provide companies with innovative solutions that enable a significant reduction in operating expenses by 2018.
[/size]“We want to encourage bold ideas, not just tweak current processes,” Korsnick said. “We are operating in markets with a glut of natural gas at historically low prices, concurrent with low growth in electricity demand nationally. We are seeking to redesign fundamental plant processes to significantly improve operational efficiencies and effectiveness, and in the process make nuclear energy facilities more economically viable.”[/color]
[/size]U.S. nuclear energy facilities for many years have operated at sustained high levels of safety, as documented by an array of performance metrics. However, many plants in deregulated states have been earning lower revenues during an unprecedented era of low natural gas prices and subsidies for other electricity sources. [/size]
[/size]“This is an initiative to reduce our operating costs, without question, but advancing safety and reliability are foundational aspects of this plan.”[/color]
[/size]Teams of industry experts already are examining areas such as engineering, work management and corrective action programs to identify more efficient and effective means to accomplish their work. Chief nuclear officers from across the industry are aligned in their commitment to implement the strategic plan and its goals, with governance by utility chief executive officers.[/color]
[/size]“We will be looking at a mix of quick wins—things that can be implemented relatively short- term—and things we know are going to take a while to implement, but are very valuable,” Korsnick said. [/color]

[/size]I have observed utilities cutting back on outage RP/HP support. For decades HP/RP have been considered a waste of money and manpower. Now it is official. We are the short term solution and no longer perform any more of those pesky, confusing, insignificant, and documentary surveys. The utilities, NEI, INPO, and NRC have pushed for ALARA and it has become cost counter prohibitive. We are going back to the dark ages when only 9 people were needed to run the RP Dept.1  RPM1  Dosimetry6  Operations / Environmental support1  ChemistryOther departments would time share administrative support as needed.The RPM could be shared between a number of plants or facilities. All plants have contamination monitors at the access points. You need to depend on them more and cross train security to decontaminate personnel. Issue plant coveralls to everyone at the gate.Just let it go. Most of the levels of contamination and exposure are below most harmful thresholds. Let the lawyers settle it. Just blame NEI, INPO and management for cutting safety for dollars.

The irony of a bunch of industry members sitting around debating ways to cut money while billing the industry no small amount of money between expensive and low-value visits was quite funny to me.

Has the movie "Office Space" written all over it.  Now if you will excuse me, I have a meeting with the Bobs.

Bonds 25:
Until I see an extreme reduction is security force, the Nuclear Promise is nothing but a bunch of words that are not addressing the real issues when it comes to overhead expenses that truly have no legit reason for being such a burden on the Industry.

The Nuclear Promise comes plant puts up more ridiculous razor ribbon and delay fences.....hires an additional 20 security officers.

Old HP:
Has anyone else noticed that their cost of living has gone up over the last five years? While the pay for techs has stayed the same and in some utilities it has actually gone down. Now with the nuclear promise things are looking even less promising for Radiation Protection Techs.


[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version