Case Study : the development of Korean Nuclear Power Infrastructure IL SOON HWANG* and SUNG YEOL CHOI School of Energy Systems Engineering *Director Nuclear Transmutation Energy Research Center of Korea Seoul National University, Seoul, Republic of Korea Workshop on the Evaluation Methodology for Nuclear Power Infrastructure Development IAEA, Vienna, December 2008

Acknowledgments Alex R. Burkart of US Department of State for his encouragement to initiate this work and constant support Yury Sokolov, C. Russell Clark, and Ki-Sig Kang of IAEA Poong-Eil Juhn of Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute (KAERI) Chang Hyo Kim of Korea Atomic Energy Commission Si Hwan Kim of Ulsan University Sang Doug Park of Korea Electric Power Research Institute Nam-Sung Ahn of Korea Electric Power Corporation (KEPCO) Tae-Eun Yang formerly of Korea Hydro and Nuclear Power Han Young Lee of KAERI Koo Woun Park formerly of Korea Power Engineering Company Soon Heung Chang of KAIST Chong Hun Rieh, the former KEPCO President IAEA December 20082

Outline 1 Background of Korean Case Incubation of Korean NP Programme 2 3 NEPIO : Cradle for the 1 st NP Programme Lessons Learned from Korean NP Programme 4 5 Summary : Korean NP Programme IAEA December

 Densely populated & heavily industrialized  >97% energy is imported (~35% of all import)  ~36% of national electricity from 20 NPP’s  National Plan to increase to 59% by 2030 Background of Korean Case IAEA December “Atom for Peace” fostered the NP Study in the devastated Korea following Korean War (1950–53) and greatly helped successful Startup of 1st NPP(Kori-1) in 1978 First Korean NPP Startup In 1978 GDP per Capita ($)

Seoul Kori Ulchin Wolsung Younggwang Operation Under planning OPR1000 Under construction Background of Korean Case Kori - the site of the 1 st Korean NPP : before (top) and now (bottom). IAEA December 20085

6 Incubation of Korean NP Programme Nuclear Energy Programme Implementing Office (NEPIO)

Incubation of Korean NP Programme IAEA December Preparation 1958 Enact Atomic Energy Act & Establish NEPIO 1957 Join IAEA 1956 First ICPUAE, ROK-US Bilateral Agreement & Pre-NEPIO 1961 National plan 1968 Confirm 20 year Plan, Sign NPT & Invite Bid for NPP 1964 Start Site Evaluation and Selection (confirm site in 1966) st 5yr Economic Development Plan, MOST, KAERI, KEPCO 1969Contracted 1978 Commercial Operation of 1 st NPP 1975 Entry into force of NPT & Join CSA 1971 Begin 1st NPP Construction on Turnkey Basis1978 Operation & localization 1990 Separate Regulator (KINS) from KAERI 1989 Start NPP Standardization & Join COCOM 1981 Nuclear Safety Center within KAERI Phase 1 Phase 3 Phase 2 Phase 4

Competent NEPIO for developing national plan –Endowing NEPIO strong authority and manpower for the national plan development –Maintaining continuous infrastructural investment under the government leadership –Close coordination with economic and industrial development plan Continual assessment and update of national plan –In-depth evaluation of world NP industry & experiences –Develop a national plan and undertake internal reviews –Coordinate international reviews (including IAEA) IAEA December NEPIO : Cradle for the 1 st NP Programme

IAEA December NEPIO : Cradle for the 1st NP Programme Korean NEPIO in 1958 with competent members drawn from government, universities, research institutes.

Korean NP Programme and National Economic Developments in s IAEA December NEPIO : Cradle for the 1 st NP Programme Systemic Strategies NP Program (NEPIO) Export- driven Economy Heavy & Chemical Industry Plan Labor intensive Industry Plan Agricultural Development Plan Stable & inexpensive electricity Reducing food imports Labor intensive consumer products Financing Industrial synergy for localization Cheap labor NPT National security via economic development Safety Legal & regulatory framework Stable & inexpensive electricity International Collaborations

Human Resource Development –Training for improving technical ability and obtaining high quality human resources support –Safeguard efforts under international cooperations Activities ( , phase 1 and 2)Sum International conference and symposium (both attending and hosting) 47 times Inviting foreign technical experts61 times (81 persons: 1 day ~18 mos.) Sending internal human resources310 persons under poor financial condition Participation in international scientific projects16 times (with IAEA) Safety and proliferation resistance systemBi-lateral, IAEA-INFCI and NPT IAEA December NEPIO : Cradle for the 1st NP Programme

–Evaluation, Reviews and Plan Reports –Database and materials for decision making and systematic cooperation IAEA December Long-term plan for next 20 years Site investigation and selection of NPP Investigation of the trends world NP society Long term energy supply and demand plan with NPP Feasibility study of a NPP NEPIO : Cradle for the 1st NP Programme

several internal review IAEA external consultants IAEA December NEPIO : Cradle for the 1st NP Programme

Lessons Learned from Korean NP Program  NEPIO played key roles during Phases 1 and 2.  Developed needed infrastructures in 10 years  The 1st NPP on turnkey basis for safety and QA  Continued collaboration among former NEPIO members led to competitive NP infrastructure of Korea. IAEA December s Three turnkey NPP with limited internal procurement to non- safety areas: inability of Korean industry to meet strict quality standards 1980s Standardization of 6 NPP’s with 950MWe (non-turnkey) involving domestic subcontractors: Establishing AE company & Classifying component by localization feasibility 1990s Become the prime contractor with foreign subcontractors: Localization program contributes to improve economy, to increase capacity factor, and to establish complete and up-to-date infrastructure for competitive NP programme

Lessons Learned from Korean NP Program Continuous investment under the government leadership with enhancing safety feature caused TMI & Chernobyl accident Initial overestimation of economic growth IAEA December Chernobyl TMI Orange : new construction Dark Red : total generation Still increases of total power generation because of growing availability factor Oil Crisis In 1980s, Korea had plan to increase NPP up to about 40 units by However, Korea did not reach it because of slowed economy and anti- nuclear movement. WORLD KOREA

Lessons Learned from Korean NP Program Excellent operation and safety records. –Increasing localization of NPP leads high load factor and low unplanned outage –High load factor leads to low generation cost –Aiming at 100% localization of APR1400 by 2012 IAEA December

 Governmental Mechanisms National position Program management Legislative framework National electrical grid Stakeholder involvement Human resources development  Safeguard & Security Safeguards Security and physical protection  Safety & Regulations Nuclear safety Regulatory framework Radiation protection  Site and Environment Site and supporting facilities Environmental protection Emergency planning  Financing & Industry Financing Industrial involvement Procurement  Fuel Cycle & Wastes Nuclear fuel cycle Radioactive waste Lessons Learned from Korean NP Program IAEA December 2008

Lessons Learned from Korean NP Program IAEA December Phase I & II 1 st NPP Preparation National Energy & Economic Development Progress in Nuclear Power Technology Phase V Gen IV & Hydrogen Phase IV Nuclear Waste & Fuel Cycle Phase III NP Operation & Localization Phase VI Fusion & Nuclear Vehicles

Lessons Learned from Korean NP Program  Non-proliferation National Security Concerns North Korea Effect  Legal Framework Safety Regulation Waste Management  Stakeholder = Long-term Governance  Management of Departmentalism IAEA December

Present Organization Industries and KEPCO subsidiaries 2001 KHNP Owner/operator 2001 KINAC Safeguard 2004 KINS Regulator 2004 KINS Safety- Safeguard 1990 MOST/KAERI Legislation, R&D 2001 KEPCO Owner/operator 1968 MOST/KAERI Legal Framework & R & D 1968 NEPIO Under MOST 1961 NEPIO Option #1 : Cross- cutting Organization Option #2 : MCE Why? Strong driving force 1967 Why? Human resources in engineering and scientific fields 1968, Option #1 : Separate builder/operator Option #2 : Maintain within NEPIO Why? Good financial standing & Business 1990 Why ? Needs for independent regulation 2004 Why ? Stronger Safeguards (AP) 2001 Why ? Market deregulation Why ? Rapid expansion and Specialization Pre-NEPIO 1956 Lessons Learned from Korean NP Program

Summary : Korean NP Programme Competent NEPIO played key roles for planning and implementations of successful NP programme International collaborations have been key for infrastructure development and for avoiding political mishaps and technical mistakes. Competitive infrastructure has been established. Remaining Issues –Regulatory framework –Excessive departmentalism –Nuclear waste management –Sustainable fuel cycles IAEA December