Westinghouse has decided not to bid for the fifth Finnish reactor. It considers that the single-unit procurement cannot be profitable on a turnkey basis. The comnpany favours a standardised design which would be built in a series.

Westinghouse has decided not to bid for the fifth Finnish reactor, because the single-unit procurement cannot be profitable on a turnkey basis, said Per Brunzell, a Westinghouse senior vice president.

“We think the reactor should be a standardised design which should be built in a series,” Brunzell said. “This is a business decision, based on economics. We would have made the same decision in any other country.” He said that it was hard to say how the decision would affect Westinghouse’s future international competitiveness.

This move eliminates the BWR 90+ and the AP1000 from consideration by Teollisuuden Voima Oy (TVO). Both designs were part of a group of six designs from four vendors that TVO prequalified with the Finnish Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority (STUK). The other vendors are General Electric (GE), Framatome ANP and Atomstroyexport (ASE).

Framatome said that it had submitted the letter of commitment required by TVO, and it is also thought probable that GE would bid. ASE has said that it will bid with the 1000 MWe VVER AES-91/99.

TVO chief executive Mauno Paavola declined to comment on Westinghouse’s decision. He would not say how many vendors are interested, only that “we will have a very good competition among the suppliers.” He added that bidding is not restricted to the companies prequalified by TVO. Indeed, Japan’s MHI, Toshiba and Hitachi, as well as Korean companies, are evaluating whether to bid.

Finland is the only country in western Europe where new nuclear capacity is being planned, and the unit has been described as a showcase for vendors. However, Brunzell said: “We don’t see any projects materialising elsewhere in Europe.” He also noted that despite discussion in Finland about a possible sixth reactor, “there is no sixth unit included in the government’s decision in principle to build the fifth unit or in the TVO specifications. It (the sixth reactor) is completely theoretical.” Westinghouse was at something of a disadvantage in bidding for the Finnish reactor because neither of the units that it would offer have been built before.

Framatome ANP confirmed that it will be competing for the contract, but would not confirm whether it would bid with one or both of its advanced designs, the European PWR (EPR) or the SWR-1000, a BWR. Framatome ANP said that a bid would be submitted to TVO by the beginning of 2003. It seems probable that Framatome ANP will propose the passively safe SWR-1000. If Westinghouse will not be bidding, that will leave Framatome ANP and GE as the only bidders for a BWR.

If the AP1000 is no longer an option, TVO will probably have to choose between the 1500 MWe EPR and the smaller Russian VVER 91/99 if it wants a PWR. ASE has an advantage in that it is already building two VVER 91/99 units at Tianwan in China.

ASE is offering an updated design in the new bid, which it says has features not available on any other design under construction.

Final bids are due to be delivered toTVO by the end of March. TVO chief executive Mauno Paavola has said that arranging financing for the unit is progressing. Such financing has to be in place when a contract is signed, he said. TVO hopes to sign a contract by the end of 2003.