Taipower Responds to Former Supervisor's Claims on Taipower's 4th Nuclear Power Plant Restart Feasibility

In response to recent statements by a former supervisor of Taiwan Power Company (Taipower) regarding the feasibility of restarting the 4th Nuclear Power Plant (Lungmen Nuclear Power Plant), Taipower emphasized the need for practical and cautious handling of the issue. The former supervisor stated that the plant could be reactivated in 3 years with a budget of NT$30 billion; these claims lack professional evaluation and oversimplify the significant safety considerations involved.

According to the 2021 referendum, the majority of public opinion remains concerned about the safety of the 4th Nuclear Power Plant and opposes its restart. Additionally, many of the plant's original equipment manufacturers have ceased production, raising concerns about the feasibility of finding a team to continue construction, which affects both the timeline and cost estimates. Even if there is an intention to continue construction, challenges such as conducting new geological surveys and updating related equipment persist.

Taipower pointed out that much of the 4th Nuclear Power Plant's equipment was designed over 20 years ago, and the original manufacturers have ceased production. Confirmation is needed on whether any manufacturers are willing to reassemble teams for construction, testing, verification, and warranty. Furthermore, the plant, which commenced construction in 1999 and was sealed in 2013, has had its construction license expire. To resume construction at the original site, a new geological survey must be conducted to account for new geological data, and the digital control system must be updated as it has exceeded its service life.

Taipower stressed that restarting the 4th Nuclear Power Plant would be a daunting long-term challenge, with the timeline and costs difficult to estimate. The former supervisor's claim that the plant could be restarted by simply renegotiating with international manufacturers without updating the control systems and using Unit 2 as a spare parts warehouse is unsubstantiated and likely underestimates the complexity of the project and the current international nuclear energy situation.

Additionally, in response to the former supervisor's suggestion to invite consultants who conducted the safety inspection to assist in the restart, intending to have foreign experts endorse the safety of the plant, Taipower clarified that in April 2013, in response to external doubts about the safety inspection results, the then-chairman of the Atomic Energy Council stated in the Legislative Yuan that no national nuclear regulatory body, international nuclear organization, or impartial third-party agency would certify the safety of another country's nuclear power plant. Taipower further explained that resuming construction would require redesigning the safety digital system platform and obtaining certification from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, contrary to the former supervisor's claim that only retesting the original control system would suffice.

Taipower pointed out that the 2021 referendum on the 4th Nuclear Power Plant showed high local opposition to its restart, clearly indicating public rejection. Given the high uncertainty in the construction timeline and cost estimates for restarting the plant, public acceptance remains doubtful. The former supervisor's proposal to restart the plant also neglects the critical aspect of public opinion.

Taipower emphasized that the 4th Nuclear Power Plant issue is highly complex and has numerous challenges, including inherent construction procedural problems, non-compliance incidents during construction, procurement and construction discrepancies, and regulatory violations. The former supervisor did not provide concrete professional insights into these issues, nor did he address unresolved past problems. His proposal lacks professional evaluation and a solid basis, failing to adequately consider the safety implications of restarting the plant.