Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
It’s worth looking into venture capital firms such as Nucleation Capital. Some have low bars of entry but do require cash flow commitments over a period of time. These can get you into startup reactor (fission and fusion) design company ownership.
I agree SDP is a net positive and I do much prefer it to the alternative. Some pitfalls to be aware of though are:
1. Each utility is going to bring the expectations of their in-house design process to SDP. If extensive implementation notes were required in their old process, they’ll be expected in the new process and maybe even required in their specific “How We’re Implementing SDP” procedures. Be cautious in jumping from one utility to another (or even site to site) and speak with someone who has worked a mod with them before.
2. Perhaps the most extensive variance in the SDP I’ve seen across utilities is the application of the “down-graded” processes (DECP or CCP vs. DCP). There is wording in the SDP for each of these that ultimately allows the design manager to approve using any process he/she would like. Most often, that means a utility or site opts for a more onerous process out of conservatism and familiarity above and beyond what is required by IP-ENG-001.
Note also that many utilities (SNC, STARS Alliance among others) are moving toward further standardization with a cloud-based design process system such as CMISDP. Some have plans to create web-based forms for 50.59s, FP forms, and even specifications in the coming years. One of the benefits of this is that I can look at a similar mod done by another utility for OE if they are willing to share it and are using the same system.