It has often been said that 99% of an enterprise's ... - Atomic Electricity

LFTR’S DECENTRALIZED DEVELOPMENT AS A RISK MANAGEMENT STRATEGY PAGE 2 OF 5Peer review. This requires the evaluation of creative work or performance by other people in thesame field in order to maintain or enhance the quality of the work or performance in that field. Itis predicated on the concept that a larger and more diverse group of people will find moreweaknesses and errors in a work or performance and make a more impartial evaluation of it thanjust the creators alone.Peer review utilizes the independence of the reviewers in order to discourage cronyism (i.e.,favoritism shown to relatives, friends, or fellow employees of the same corporate entity) andobtain an unbiased evaluation.Peer review for the manufacturer. The Scientific Advisory Committee will encompass multiplepoints of view for each development area (e.g., 1--Brayton cycle development: UC Berkeley,Czech University, Scandia National Labs; 2—Molten salt reprocessing: Nuclear ResearchInstitute Rez, Oak Ridge National Lab, Kim Johnson, K.Sorensen, Teledyne Brown Engineering,and so on). Each one with a legitimately differing point of view -- the Chief Technology Officerand the Steering Committee will select and referee the efforts in each development area toachieve the LeBlanc LFTR design outcome cost-benefit requirements.Peer review of the LFTR. Neutronics computer codes will enable the modeling of all aspects ofthe LFTR. These programs will inform the development, but just as importantly, they mustobjectively monitor and verify each aspect of the development – build-up of noble metals / gases,TRU processing, heat exchanger and core / blanket barrier’s performance, molten salt flow –each plant component and behavior must be projected for regulators’ analysis and evaluationbefore the fact, and proved out in real-time tests.The objective measurements of safety and performance parameters must be defined anddemonstrated with computer modeling whose well-annotated operating methodology andextensive results iterations can be readily explicated and justified to regulatory authorities. TheSystem Integrator uses its neutronics computer codes and modeling to perform a fiduciaryreview and verification of all regulatory issues encompassing the working plant. This SystemIntegrator effort must be executed contemporaneously with the development and manufacturingefforts so that independent process can inform the other.These parallel and objective processes will thus generate an optimally safe and manageableworking plant costs-benefits solution within the shortest amount of time. Performing theseprocesses serially through a singular enterprise invites reiteration of the development phase toaddress after-the-fact regulator concerns before manufacturing can commence and LFTRworking plants can be certified for export.The regulatory authorities (IAEA and Indian Nuclear Export Authority) can be educated in thesafety / operating issues and concerns of two-fluid molten salt thorium breeder reactors. TheSystem Integrator’s modeling process will provide the regulatory authorities with a real-timeinterrogatory to inject questions and challenges to the working plant as it is evolved andtransformed into a mass-produced turnkey system. The third-party independence of this SystemIntegration effort is integral to its viability and acceptance by the regulatory authorities.Political Risks. India has organized its Global Centre for Nuclear Energy Partnerships todevelop new nuclear power generator designs.India has the second largest deposit of thorium in the world. India has very little uraniumdeposits.