Nuclear Decommissioning Case Studies: Organization and Management, Economics, and Staying in Business

By Michele Laraia

Nuclear Decommissioning Case Studies: Organization and Management, Economics, and Staying in Business is the fifth volume in Michele Laraia’s series, which presents a selection of global case studies on different aspects of nuclear decommissioning. This volume focuses on organization, economics and performance experience, offering the reader guidance on project management, staffing, costs and funding, and training. It guides those responsible for the planning and implementation of nuclear decommissioning to ensure thorough and reliable applications.

Decommissioning experts, including regulators, operating organizations, waste managers, researchers, and academics will find this book to be suitable supplementary material to reference works on the theory and applications of nuclear decommissioning. Readers will obtain an understanding of many key case studies, including what happened and what they can learn from the events quoted, to help supplement, solidify, and strengthen their understanding of the topic.

• Presents a selection of global case studies which focus on organization, economics and performance of nuclear decommissioning in relation to project and industry sustainability, with a focus on management, funding, and training aspects
• Includes 100+ case studies on project management, costs and funding, and teaching and learning
• Based on experience and lessons learned, assists the reader in developing and implementing decommissioning plans while ensuring the availability of technical, financial, and human resources at all times

• Language: English
• Publisher: Academic Press
• Release date: Jan 11, 2023
• ISBN: 9780323919494

Book preview

Nuclear Decommissioning Case Studies

Organization and Management, Economics, and Staying in Business

Michele Laraia

Table of Contents

Cover image

Title page

Copyright

Dedication

Foreword

Disclaimer

Chapter 1. Introduction

Chapter 2. The concept of environmental sustainability as applicable to this book

Chapter 3. The structure of this book: project management, costs and funding, assessing, and upgrading human resources

Chapter 4. Errors, mishaps, inadequacies in regard to organizational aspects (conversely, best practices)

Chapter 5. Project management case studies (IAEA, 2000a)

5.1. Argonne's deactivation and decommissioning program, Argonne National Laboratory, Illinois United States (DOE-ANL, 2013)

5.2. Four Savannah River Site (SRS) contractors earn at least 95% of contract award fee (DOE Newswire, 2022)

5.3. Contract transition—Project Hanford management contract to mission support contract (DOE-RL, 2010)

5.4. ORNL organizations partner in decommissioning of buildings, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Tennessee, United States (ORNL, 2006)

5.5. Subcontractor falls from ladder, suffering multiple fractures, Argonne National Laboratory, Illinois, United States (DOE-ANL, 2010)

5.6. Audit report on quality assurance for river corridor closure contract procurements, Hanford Site, Washington State, United States (DOE, 2017)

5.7. Critical spare parts deficiencies, Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), Tennessee, United States (ORNL, 2017)

5.8. Work force restructuring, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Tennessee, United States (ORNL, 1996)

5.9. Human and organizational risks: a historical review of the involved issues (Pelleterat de Borde et al., 2013)

5.10. Examples from a decommissioning project in French nuclear center (Devaux, 2011)

5.11. Organizational and human factors in dismantling of nuclear facilities: the experience of France's IRSN (IRSN, 2008)

5.12. The impacts of human factors on organizational transitions, Hanford Site, Washington State, United States (DOE-RL, 2013)

5.13. Subcontractor requirements flow-down process, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, United States(ORNL, 2019)

5.14. Procurement of container liners by subcontractors, Hanford Site, Washington State, United States (DOE-RCCC, 2008)

5.15. Transferring areas between contractors, Idaho Operations Office (ID)/Idaho National Lab (INL) (DOE-Wikispaces, 2012)

5.16. Use of contractor with limited resources leads to project delay, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Tennessee, United States (DOE-ORNL, 2014)

5.17. Control of subcontractor operating heavy equipment on-site, Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant, Ohio, United States (DOE-Portsmouth, 2005)

5.18. Innovative acquisition strategy leads to significant efficiencies and savings (DOE-LANL, 2011a)

5.19. Need for effective management oversight, separations process research unit, Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory (KAPL), New York, United States (DOE-SPRU, 2011)

5.20. Coordinate with multiple entities performing various work activities, Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant (PGDP), United States (DOE-Paducah, 2008)

5.21. EFCOG (Energy Facility Contractors Group) best practice: contractor assurance system effectiveness validation, 2017 (DOE-EFCOG, 2017)

5.22. Coordination with Environmental Programs group leads to building TA-1-209 D&D cost savings and less dangerous work, Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), New Mexico, United States (DOE-LANL, 2011b)

5.23. The transition in terms of organizational change (NEA, 2018)

5.24. Changes in staffing can weaken the ability to maintain a high level of rigor in operations, Hanford Site, Washington State, United States (DOE-RL, 2011)

5.25. Performance indicators in decommissioning (IAEA, 2011)

5.26. ORPS data indicates work process deficiencies at active deactivation and decommissioning projects (DOE-ORPS, 2020)

5.27. Approach to define and document completion of performance-based incentive, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, United States (ORNL, 2015)

5.28. Performance indicators at Vandellos I NPP, Spain (IAEA, 2011)

5.29. Use of performance indicators in nuclear facility decommissioning in the UK (IAEA, 2011)

5.30. Sweden case study: interface with project delivery tools (NEA, 2019)

5.31. Nuclear decommissioning assistance program in Lithuania (EC, 2021)

5.32. Graded approach (IAEA, 2008)

5.33. A graded approach to safety analysis for rover processing facility deactivation, Idaho chemical processing plant, Idaho National Laboratory, United States (Henrikson, 1997)

5.34. The graded management approach to Battelle's nuclear project, Columbus, Ohio, United States (Voth, 1996)

5.35. Using a risk-informed, graded approach for decommissioning small facilities: the position of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) (Persinko, undated)

5.36. Applications of the graded approach in Belgium (EAN, 2018)

5.37. The classification of radioactive waste: the IAEA position (IAEA, 2014a)

5.38. Graded approach in the clearance of slightly-contaminated materials: the position of the IAEA (IAEA, 2021a)

5.39. Decommissioning quality management manual: two examples of typical contents (De, 1999)

5.40. Software quality assurance problems, Hanford Site, Washington State, United States (DOE-RL, 2004)

5.41. Documented and defensible: the extraordinary value of quality in high-consequence projects, Hanford Site, Washington State, United States (DOE-PNNL, 2018)

5.42. Project team fails to adjust QA rigor to evolving project needs, Hanford Site, Washington State, United States (DOE-PNNL, 2011)

5.43. Manufacturer's inaccurate certification may lead to use of DOT 7A/Type A drums with noncompliant documentation, Hanford Site, Washington State, United States (DOE-RL, 2021)

5.44. Scope management system for decommissioning project in Korea (Kook-Nam Park et al., 2017)

5.45. Safety culture and organizational resilience in the nuclear industry throughout the different lifecycle phase: a Finnish study (VTT, 2015)

5.46. Practical aspects of safety culture: the position of SOGIN, Italy (Tripputi, 2014)

5.47. Operational pause at Savannah River Site benefits safety culture, operations (DOE, 2016)

5.48. Safety culture and employee concerns program in a decommissioned environment: regulator's perspective (Sieracki and Burnside, 2017)

5.49. Assessment of safety culture at Ignalina Nuclear Power Plant (INPP): early planning for decommissioning (Lesin, 2003)

5.50. Organizational and institutional structures and responsibilities in a post-accident situation (IAEA, 2021b)

Chapter 6. Costs and funding case studies

6.1. Decommissioning nuclear power plants: cost estimation challenges (NEI, 2017)

6.2. Comparison of estimated and actual decommissioning cost of José Cabrera NPP (ENRESA, 2016)

6.3. Calculating and estimating decommissioning costs in the US (Hylko, 2017)

6.4. Factors impacting decommissioning costs for US NPPs: the EPRI study (Kim and McGrath, 2013)

6.5. Walkdowns and preparation of cost estimates for decommissioning of redundant facilities, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), Livermore, California, United States (Costella et al., 2020)

6.6. Lessons learned on cost estimating reviews (DOE, 2016)

6.7. Challenges in cost estimation under uncertainty—A case study of the decommissioning of Barsebäck nuclear power plant (Torp and Klakegg, 2016)

6.8. To get better control over decommissioning costs (NEI, 2013)

6.9. Earned value management system (DOE, 2018)

6.10. Missed medical exams result in unnecessary costs, Hanford site, Washington State, United States (DOE, 2010)

6.11. Open air demolition of radiologically contaminated Building O1-14at the West Valley Demonstration Project (WVDP), New York State, United States (D&D KM-IT, 2014)

6.12. Two case studies regarding reduction or stabilization of decommissioning costs, United Kingdom -decommissioning process; problem encountered; impacts

6.13. Data could point out to nuclear plant decommissioning costs falling (POWER, 2018)

6.14. European parliament, nuclear decommissioning: management of costs and risks in the European Union (EP, 2013)

6.15. An overview of decommissioning risks common to different power plants (nuclear, coal-fired etc.) (Riggins, 2019)

6.16. Exploring four financial shortfall scenarios (Lordan-Perret et al., 2021)

6.17. Decommissioning trust funds: enlarging the fixed income opportunities (Mittal, 2021)

6.18. Financing future liabilities (NEI, 2010)

6.19. Two case studies about Vermont Yankee's DTF

6.20. NRC's oversight of nuclear power reactors' decommissioning funds could be further strengthened (GAO, 2012)

6.21. NRC findings on the minimum amounts required demonstrate decommissioning funding assurance (NRC, 2013)

6.22. Exemption allows Humboldt Bay-3 licensee to reduce the minimum coverage limit for on-site property damage insurance (NRC, 2020)

6.23. Impact of American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) on DOE-EM's D&D program (DOE, 2013)

6.24. Financial issues in a postaccident situation (IAEA-2021)

Chapter 7. Assessing and upgrading human resources: case studies

7.1. Performance improvement and human resources transition management in D&D projects, AREVA, La Hague nuclear fuel reprocessing plant , France (Clement et al., 2015)

7.2. Workforce reductions, outsourcing, and loss of organizational prestige can cause an erosion of technical capability (DOE-NNSA, 2004)

7.3. Training for decommissioning and waste management in Germany (Kettler and Havenith, 2020)

7.4. Nuclear decommissioning technicians, contract, AWE Aldermaston, Berkshire, United Kingdom (oilvoice, 2019)

7.5. Details of standard- occupation: nuclear operative (Institute for Apprenticeships, 2018)

7.6. Nuclear decommissioning: attracting and retaining skills (NDA, 2016)

7.7. Education and training in nuclear decommissioning—needs, opportunities, and challenges for Europe (EC and University of Birmingham, 2015)

7.8. Development of a decommissioning certificate program, Hanford Site, Washington State, United States (Hoover and Morton, 1999)

7.9. Training implications associated with organizational structure and changes, Argonne National Laboratory, Illinois, United States (DOE-ANL, 2013)

7.10. Use of mock-ups in decommissioning training: two case studies

7.11. UK decom sector must change plant staff mind-set to avoid labor shortage (Reuters Events, 2016)

7.12. Route to success, Dounreay Establishment, Caithness, Scotland, United Kingdom (NEI, 2017)

7.13. From operation to decommissioning, a training challenge at Jose Cabrera NPP, Spain (Martin et al., 2013)

7.14. Rocky Flats closure legacy, Jefferson county, Colorado, United States (DOE, 2011)

7.15. How to become a Decontamination Technician in the United States (Environmental Science, 2022)

7.16. International training to promote successful environmental remediation projects (Smith et al., 2018)

Chapter 8. Conclusions

Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations

Glossary

Index

Copyright

Academic Press is an imprint of Elsevier

125 London Wall, London EC2Y 5AS, United Kingdom

525 B Street, Suite 1650, San Diego, CA 92101, United States

50 Hampshire Street, 5th Floor, Cambridge, MA 02139, United States

The Boulevard, Langford Lane, Kidlington, Oxford OX5 1GB, United Kingdom

Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Details on how to seek permission, further information about the Publisher’s permissions policies and our arrangements with organizations such as the Copyright Clearance Center and the Copyright Licensing Agency, can be found at our website: www.elsevier.com/permissions.

This book and the individual contributions contained in it are protected under copyright by the Publisher (other than as may be noted herein).

Notices

Knowledge and best practice in this field are constantly changing. As new research and experience broaden our understanding, changes in research methods, professional practices, or medical treatment may become necessary.

Practitioners and researchers must always rely on their own experience and knowledge in evaluating and using any information, methods, compounds, or experiments described herein. In using such information or methods they should be mindful of their own safety and the safety of others, including parties for whom they have a professional responsibility.

To the fullest extent of the law, neither the Publisher nor the authors, contributors, or editors, assume any liability for any injury and/or damage to persons or property as a matter of products liability, negligence or otherwise, or from any use or operation of any methods, products, instructions, or ideas contained in the material herein.

ISBN: 978-0-323-91848-0

For information on all Academic Press publications visit our website at https://www.elsevier.com/books-and-journals

Publisher: Charlotte Cockle

Editorial Project Manager: Rupinder K. Heron

Production Project Manager: Kumar Anbazhagan

Cover Designer: Matthew Limbert

Typeset by TNQ Technologies

Dedication

To my dear Giovanna, special acknowledgements must be made for your constant trust and support through both difficult times and good times.

Foreword

Nobody made a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could do only a little.

Edmund Burke, statesman, economist, and philosopher (1729–1797)

You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.

R. Buckminster Fuller, architect, systems theorist, author, designer, inventor, philosopher, critic of work, and futurist (1895–1983)

The life cycle of a nuclear facility (whose culmination is decommissioning) overlaps and interacts with the principles of sustainability (see Glossary, Life Cycle Management).

The issue of sustainability is being brought into prominence as the multiple effects of large-scale human activities are recognized. Furthermore, the interdependency of sustainability-related issues has become increasingly apparent, witness the balance needed between land use for urban development, food production, bio-fuel production, ecology, and biodiversity preservation. Nuclear facilities, including their decommissioning, are not immune to such issues, and governments are likely to increasingly seek to understand and manage the sustainability of nuclear activities.

According to Brundtland (1987), sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. It embodies two key concepts:

• "the concept of ‘needs’, in particular the essential needs of the world's poor, to which overriding priority should be given; and

• the idea of limitations imposed by the state of technology and social organization on the environment's ability to meet present and future needs."

The principle of sustainability is closely related to the polluter pays principle (PPP). One consequence of the PPP is the principle of intergenerational equity (Lindskog, 2013).

In other words, sustainability implies short- and long-term environmental protection, economic development, and social progress. A key challenge for implementation of sustainability policies is to integrate these three requirements (sometimes called sustainability pillars) in a way that does not unduly privilege (or compromise) any of them. The reader should note that the three sustainability pillars have expanded over time to include related aspects, sub-categories, and interpretations, resulting in such diagrams as the one given in Fig. 1.

Energy plays a key role among sustainability issues. The generation and use of energy are vital and intrinsic to economic growth and social welfare. These inherent aspects of energy may leave out the environmental impact, and indeed this disregard has been commonplace for centuries. To some extent, all forms of energy generation and use cause environmental impact, often including waste production and resource depletion. Moreover energy forms often involve long-term impacts (many decades or even much longer periods as is the case of nuclear decommissioning and management of resulting waste). But these inevitable consequences cannot be left uncontrolled; on the contrary, they require advance planning and mitigation. As far as possible, potential damages should be converted into opportunities.

A broad assessment of nuclear energy within a sustainability context shows that nuclear energy policies are consistent with the sustainability objective of transferring achievements and beneficial assets to future generations while maintaining environmental protection. The benefits should be ensured for as many years ahead as realistically predictable. This statement should be proven true for decommissioning as a whole and for each aspect and impact of it, and this is the ultimate objective of the Nuclear Decommissioning Case Studies series of books. As a warning, the reader should consider that decommissioning (D&D) of a nuclear facility and the environmental remediation of its nuclear site (ultimately forming one and the same process, decommissioning and environmental remediation, D&ER) are intrinsic and inevitable byproducts of a nuclear plant's life cycle: sustainability should ideally be assessed for the whole life cycle as an integrated process from plant siting onward.

Figure 1  Sustainable competitiveness model. Credit to SolAbility, Wiki Commons.

Worldwide, there are thousands of licensed nuclear facilities that will ultimately reach the end of their service life and require decommissioning. They range from large nuclear power plants (NPPs) and fuel processing facilities to smaller research laboratories, nuclear research establishments, waste storage facilities, and manufacturing plants.

There is a wealth of experience worldwide in the removing from service, dismantling, and demolishing of redundant installations. Those responsible for nuclear facilities (including among others, policy-makers, operating organizations, and waste managers) face the special challenges associated with managing their radioactive inventory over many decades of operation and well beyond it. In recognition of the risks associated with a permanently shut down facility, a safety-driven definition of decommissioning was developed by the IAEA, as follows: Administrative and technical actions taken to allow the removal of some or all of the regulatory controls from a facility (IAEA, 2014). These actions include complying not only with traditional engineering and industrial safety objectives but also with organizational, financial, human, and scientific resources and constraints determining the impact of decommissioning on the health, safety and radiation protection, and socio-economic well-being of the workers, public, and environment. It is notable that decommissioning of an NPP can normally take place from 40 years (immediate dismantling) to 100 years and more (deferred dismantling) after the beginning of nuclear operations: therefore, decommissioning-impacting decisions taken at the design and construction stage or during plant operation will show their impacts long after they have been taken and will be felt by an entire new range of stakeholders (see the PPP concept above).

To fulfil sustainable development objectives, nuclear energy must keep high standards of performance, responsiveness, and safety throughout all phases of the nuclear fuel cycle, including plant decommissioning. It is clear that the principle of sustainability should be best applied to the entire nuclear fuel cycle and to the life cycle of a nuclear installation (in all its phases, from siting, design and construction, operations, to decommissioning and site release): from this viewpoint, decommissioning should not be considered in isolation, as it is the inevitable byproduct of having built, operated, and contaminated a nuclear installation and its site. However, it is also true that abnormal (either potential or actual) impacts of decommissioning could in principle affect and alter the broad assessment of all nuclear activities; therefore, decommissioning happenings deserve a specific sustainability assessment per se.

In regard to decommissioning, the Brundtland definition can be viewed in the context of the interdependent impacts in the social, economic, and environmental areas (IAEA, 2008). In passing, the reader should note that this book (and others of this series of books) makes frequent reference to IAEA publications, which as prescribed by the IAEA Statute are limited to the radiological impacts: by contrast, the Nuclear Decommissioning Case Studies series includes all forms of impacts, being radiological impacts only a part of the total.

Nuclear decommissioning is multidisciplinary, including subjects such as policies and strategies, planning (preliminary and detailed), management of radioactive and nonradioactive waste, decontamination and dismantling technologies, radiation protection, industrial safety, record keeping, security, costs and funding, etc. Therefore to address and confirm the sustainability of nuclear decommissioning, different viewpoints are needed, and an entire series of books each covering specific, but complementary and often overlapping, subjects.

All the books of this series on Nuclear Decommissioning make predominant use of case studies (abnormal occurrences, errors, inadequacies, near-misses during the decommissioning process; or conversely, best practices and successes). The reader will note that a single case study can be assessed from different viewpoints—and be reported and discussed in different books of this series: for example, one and the same accident can be due to inadequate financial and human resources (two prominent topics of this very book) or poor planning, result in the generation of abnormal waste, and raise public anger—with the last three topics being extensively covered in other books of the Nuclear Decommissioning Case Studies series.

The case study approach allows in-depth, multifaceted explorations of complex issues in their real-life settings. The value of the case study approach is well recognized in the fields of business, law, and policy (for example, case studies in business might cover a particular company's strategy or a broader market) but less recognized in nuclear decommissioning literature. Generally, a case study can pinpoint any individual, group, organization, event, belief system, or action. A case study does not necessarily have to be one observation but may include many observations (one or multiple individuals and entities across multiple time periods, within a single case or across numerous cases).

According to Press Academia (2018):

• "A case study is a research strategy and an empirical inquiry that investigates a phenomenon within its real-life context.

• Case studies are based on an in-depth investigation of a single individual, group, or event to explore the causes of underlying principles.

• A case study is a descriptive and exploratory analysis of a person, group, or event.

• A case study research can be single or multiple case studies, includes quantitative evidence, relies on multiple sources of evidence and benefits from the prior development of theoretical propositions.

• Case studies are analysis of persons, groups, events, decisions, periods, policies, institutions or other systems that are studied holistically by one or more methods."

Gerring (2007) defines the case study approach as an intensive study of a single unit or a small number of units (the cases), for the purpose of understanding a larger class of similar units (a population of cases). Gerring also states: the defining feature of qualitative work is its use of non-comparable observations—observations that pertain to different aspects of a causal or descriptive question, whereas quantitative observations are comparable (Gerring, 2017). According to John Gerring, the key characteristic that distinguishes case studies from all other methods is the reliance on evidence drawn from a single case and its attempts, at the same time, to illuminate features of a broader set of cases (Gerring, 2007). Researchers use case studies to shed light on a class of phenomena.

Under the umbrella of case studies, there are several subdivisions, each of which can be selected by the investigator depending on the objectives of the research. For the purposes of this series of books, Cumulative Case Studies have been selected. These serve to aggregate information from several sites collected at different times. The idea behind these studies is the collection of past studies will allow for greater generalization without additional cost or time being expended on new, possibly repetitive studies (Colo, undated).

Through the use of case studies, this series of books adopts the inductive approach (as opposed to deductive, which is typical of academic books). In an inductive approach to research, a researcher begins by collecting data that are relevant to his or her topic of interest. Once a substantial amount of data have been collected, the researcher will then take a breather from data collection, stepping back to get a bird's eye view of her data. At this stage, the researcher looks for patterns in the data, working to develop a theory that could explain those patterns. Thus, when researchers take an inductive approach, they start with a set of observations and then they move from those particular experiences to a more general set of propositions about those experiences. In other words, they move from data to theory or from the specific to the general (Blackstone, 2012). On the funny side, the following quote can (try to) justify the confusion perceived by many in applying the induction method as based on case studies One of the advantages of being disorderly is that one is constantly making exciting discoveries (Alan Alexander Milne, author, 1882–1956). In this series of books, events or situations are reviewed in detail within the context of a decommissioning project, cases are analyzed and solutions, or interpretations are presented. Generic lessons learned are extracted for the benefits of the international decommissioning community. In this way, case studies provide a deeper understanding of a complex subject and help acquire experience about a given issue, a form of figurative distillation (or psychological sublimation, Fig. 2).

Figure 2  Bottom-up processing to sublimation. Credit to Jgrant67, Wiki Commons.

This series addresses not only technical challenges but also the organizational issues and human factors intertwined with nuclear decommissioning projects.

The case studies quoted in this series are connected with consolidated information and guidance presented in reference (e.g. academic) documents, such as regulatory, research, etc. In no way does the series contradicts the reference literature in the field, only the orientation (bottom-up) is different from the publications intended for direct guidance (top-down). To draw useful lessons, this series of books focuses on negative experiences, difficulties, forced changes, and alternatives investigated; best practices corroborated by success are extensively described to offer complementarity. In fact, there is perhaps greater worth in reporting on (hopefully, momentary) failures. The wisdom of learning from failure is incontrovertible. Yet organizations that do it well are extraordinarily rare (Edmondson, 2011).

The books are not intended to provide optimal solutions to all cases dealt with: each case will depend on country- or site-specific factors for which a cure-all formula simply does not exist. Rather the use of concrete examples offers a wide range of approaches, solutions, and mitigations to choose from and embark on country- or plant-specific analysis.

Understanding decommissioning in full and the difficulties involved; understanding multiple ways to solve these issues; and highlighting the influence from boundary conditions, regulations, budgets, etc. are key facets of this series. As these aspects vary not only from country to country but also from plant to plant, the series strives to showcase the range of solutions available and opportunities based on available facts, uncertainties, and unknowns. However, it would be pretentious to expect that the books of this series fully complete the path from event identification, lessons learned, solutions, recommendations, to generalization: the reader should fulfill this objective by reviewing and comparing the case studies and making use of the suggestions offered by the books.

Primarily, the expected readership of these books includes those involved in and responsible for the overall assessment of nuclear applications for their nations (especially, the use of nuclear energy). Decommissioning is an essential, inevitable phase of the life-cycle of a nuclear installation, and its sustainability should be ensured since the very beginning of a nuclear project, the plant conception. Therefore, this series of books is meant to provide informative guidance to the national decision-makers and their technical support organizations in selecting sustainable options.

In addition, the books target all decommissioning experts at different technical levels (including nuclear organizations, regulators, waste managers, contractors, university teachers, and stakeholders at large) in providing information about what they can realistically (i.e., based on experience) expect to happen during the decommissioning of nuclear installations. To this end, the books are meant to provide supplementary, up-to-date information and orientation. Once typical, events/situations are identified and described, and lessons drawn, the reader should consult specialist guidance and move from a bottom-up, case-by-case approach to a top-down, systematic approach.

The decommissioning experts will find in this series of books additional material supposed to build upon their background. Besides, the expert reader will recognize that sustainability—in its three main components or pillars—is the common thread linking all technical, organizational, and human factors highlighted in the series. In fact, many nuclear decommissioning projects are representative of events/situations common to other industries as well. Therefore, these books could also be of interest to a broader range of professionals, especially industry decision-makers and managers at large. The series can assist in the monitoring, review and revision of safety work. The descriptive, narrative, occasionally colloquial style adopted (e.g., including literature quotations and interviews with involved parties) and the extensive Glossary clarification of technical/jargon terms should also make these books more palatable to the uninitiated or to non-native English speakers.

References

1. Blackstone A. Inductive or Deductive? Two Different Approaches. Saylor Foundation; 2012 chapter 2.3 in Principles of Sociological Inquiry – Qualitative and Quantitative Method 13: 9781453328897. https://saylordotorg.github.io/text_principles-of-sociological-inquiry-qualitative-and-quantitative-methods/s05-03-inductive-or-deductive-two-dif.html.

4. Edmondson A.C. Strategies for Learning from Failure. Harvard Business Review. April 2011. https://hbr.org/2011/04/strategies-for-learning-from-failure.

2. Brundtland G. Chairman, Our Common Future The Brundtland report. Oxford, United Kingdom: World Commission on Environment and Development, Oxford University Press; 1987. https://sswm.info/sites/default/files/reference_attachments/UN%20WCED%201987%20Brundtland%20Report.pdf.

3. Colorado State University, Types of Case Studies, https://writing.colostate.edu/guides/guide.cfm?guideid=60.

10. Definition of Case Study. July 9, 2018. https://www.coursehero.com/file/45358505/case-studydessertationdocx/.

5. Gerring J. Case Study Research: Principles and Practices. Cambridge University Press; 2007: 978-0-521-85928-8. .

6. Gerring J. Qualitative Methods. Annual Review of Political Science. 2017;20(1):15–36 ISSN 1094-2939. https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/10.1146/annurev-polisci-092415-024158.

7. International Atomic Energy Agency. Managing the Socioeconomic Impact of the Decommissioning of Nuclear Facilities, Technical Reports Series No 464. Vienna: IAEA; 2008.

8. International Atomic Energy Agency. Decommissioning of Facilities, General Safety Requirements, Safety Standards Series No GSR Part 6. Vienna: IAEA; 2014.

9. Lindskog S, Sjöblom R, Labor B. Sustainability of Nuclear Energy with Regard to Decommissioning and Waste Management. International Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning. 2013;8(2):246–264. https://www.witpress.com/elibrary/sdp-volumes/8/2/689.

Disclaimer

Although the author has taken great care to review the reliability, completeness, and accuracy of the information contained in this book, neither he nor the Publisher provides any warranties in this regard nor assumes any responsibility for consequences that may arise from the use of this information. Neither the author nor the Publisher shall be liable in the event of any conflict between this book and other sources of information.

The technical implications of the information contained in this book may vary widely based on the specific facts involved and should not replace consultation with professional advisors. Although all facts the author believes to be relevant are addressed, the book is not meant to be an exhaustive coverage on the subject.

The mention of trade names, companies, or institutions does not imply any intention to infringe proprietary rights nor should it be viewed as an endorsement or recommendation (or criticism). Statements that could appear as biased judgments are unintentional and are definitely not intended to be so.

Chapter 1: Introduction

Abstract

Chapter 1 gives a general presentation of the main contents of this book. In sum, they include the concept of sustainability and how the book intends to prove sustainability of nuclear decommissioning—limited to the specific impacts of organization, costs and human resources on the safety, environmental protection and productivity of the decommissioning process; the use and role of case studies as the primary investigation technique adopted in this book; and the main characteristics and objectives of the book that are expected to attract the attention of the readers.

Keywords

Case studies; Costs; Human resources; Management; Organization; Sustainability

Our biggest challenge in this new century is to take an idea that seems abstract—sustainable development—and turn it into a reality for all the world’s people

Kofi Annan, diplomat, seventh Secretary-General of the United Nations (1938–2018).

Sustainability is the main thread running through this book (the fifth volume of the series presented in the Foreword). Actual or potential errors, corrections, or inadequacies occurring during the establishment or change of decommissioning organizations, financial crises, insufficient qualifications and training for decommissioning, or successful approaches to these aspects are highlighted with their impacts being qualitative indicators of the sustainability of the decommissioning process. However, this book is not a comprehensive catalog of events/situations (an almost impossible undertaking) nor is it aimed at conducting the a priori assessment of what can go wrong during decommissioning planning/implementation or imparting-related guidance. Nonetheless, a number of good and bad practices are identified in the description of many events/situations reported in this book.

This book is based on experience and feedback. It identifies a significant number of typical events/situations and indirectly allows the reader to arrive at a qualitative judgment on the overall sustainability of nuclear decommissioning (note this book is limited to the impacts of organization, costs and human resources on the safety, environmental protection and productivity of the decommissioning process: other volumes of the series Nuclear Decommissioning Case Studies assess the sustainability of nuclear decommissioning from different viewpoints).

Decommissioning of nuclear facilities is a complex process involving technologies such as radiological characterization, decontamination, dismantling of structures, systems and components (SSC), and the handling of radioactive and other hazardous waste. However, many management and organizational needs arise during decommissioning projects. Factors such as change management during the operations-to-decommissioning transition, costs and funding of decommissioning, and the need of dedicated competence and training may affect the decommissioning project, as this book tries to explain through case studies. Published information and guidance on the impacts of management and organizational aspects on decommissioning is scarce in comparison with that on technical subjects. Reasons for this discrepancy may be due to overemphasizing the decommissioning technologies or to national, political, or socio-economic situations. Guidance on organizational aspects may lead to better decision-making, reductions in time and resources, and lower occupational doses (IAEA, 2000, 2013).

The scope of the book is not primarily aimed at decommissioning following severe nuclear accidents (e.g., at Fukushima or Chornobyl) although some reference is made to accidents to highlight differences from planned, routine decommissioning projects. It is the author's view that severe nuclear accidents could be legitimately used to dispute the overall sustainability of the whole nuclear fuel cycle but only to a minor extent the consequent decommissioning per se (i.e. a de facto situation).

The bulk of this book consists of case studies. Each case study provides information on:

• Origin, evolution, and conclusion of actual organization/management practices and aspects thereof impacting—positively or negatively—the conduct of decommissioning at different types of nuclear installations;

• Actual or potential impacts from inadequate or wrong organization/management approaches and the need for corrections/updates; conversely, good practices are also addressed;

• Analyses and applied solutions, proposals, innovations, improvements, and changes made in the short and long term; and

• An assessment of the technical meaning of the case study in terms of general applicability (recommendations, lessons learned).

This information has never yet been collected and evaluated in one publication: in particular, the reader should note that the decommissioning case studies reviewed in this book are internationally based in that they have been drawn from a number of countries including: Australia; Belgium; Finland; France; Germany; Iraq; Italy; Japan; Lithuania; Republic of Korea; Slovakia; Spain; Sweden; the United Kingdom; and the United States.

The main characteristics of the book that should be most valuable to the reader are listed below in a logical sequence as follows:

• Identifying and understanding the typical organization/management practices directly impacting the smooth and successful conduct of decommissioning and emphasizing the most successful ones;

• Generically evaluating the overall impact of organizational practices throughout the period preparatory to, and continuing well into, decommissioning; and

• Confirming the sustainability of nuclear decommissioning in relation to these practices.

References

1. International Atomic Energy Agency, . Organization and Management for Decommissioning of Large Nuclear Facilities Technical Reports Series No. 399. Vienna: IAEA; 2000.

2. International Atomic Energy Agency, . Planning, Management and Organizational Aspects of the Decommissioning of Nuclear Facilities IAEA-TECDOC No 1702. Vienna: IAEA; 2013.

Chapter 2: The concept of environmental sustainability as applicable to this book

Abstract

This chapter clarifies in more detail how the main topics of this book are addressed to demonstrate sustainability. The chapter highlights that an adequate decommissioning-oriented organization (including, among others, organizational structures, financial mechanisms, and personnel training) is conducive to sustainable development. Organizational effectiveness and efficiency while planning for or implementing decommissioning are viewed as indicators of sustainability.

While there is general agreement on the concept of sustainability, its meaning in actual cases is more blurred and less defined. This chapter tries to clarify the links between the concept of sustainability and the proper approach to decommissioning and environmental remediation as framed in this book. In the reviewed case studies, this book will focus on the underlying links to the three pillars of sustainability: economic development, social progress, and environmental protection. It is even more difficult to prove a relationship between sustainability and the subsets of decommissioning that center on organization aspects—the very scope of the book.

Finally, this chapter will expand on a few cases where dedicated teams have been monitoring the sustainability of specific decommissioning projects and rewarding the best achievements.

Keywords

Awards; Decision-making; Financial mechanisms; Organizational structures; Personnel training; Sustainability

Real human beings take precedence over partisan interests; however, legitimate the latter may be

Pope Francis (1936 –)

In this book, we would like to advocate the case for developing an adequate decommissioning-oriented organization (including, among others, organizational structures, financial mechanisms, and personnel training) in support of sustainable development. While it is not obvious to see how the organizational features might directly support sustainability, in fact, they do support all three pillars of sustainability. For example, Human Relations (HR, Glossary) policies and systems create an organizational climate in which caring about employees' concerns, promoting employee engagement, involvement, and retention at workplace become normal but powerful factors utilized by the responsible leaders. Several studies point out at emotional competencies, employee engagement, and leadership role in change management (e.g., from plant operations to decommissioning), in which helping employees to enhance their skills to manage knowledge at workplace is tantamount to helping organizations to improve upon their performance. Additionally, linkages between the independence of responsible employees and the authority given to managers are essential to assess and respond effectively to make organization resilient. Relying on sound and flexible organization affords the industry, confronted with constraint budgets, the possibility of lowering the costs of carrying out decommissioning, without compromising on the safe management of national and corporate resources and the well-being of the public. This helps the social dimension of Agenda (2030) for Sustainable Development (Glossary) (UN, 2015)

This book considers sustainability mainly from the standpoint of sustainable development, as represented by the smooth and effective progress of decommissioning projects while benefitting social and economic conditions, now and in the future, and protecting the environment. This is what a well-designed, but adaptable organization accomplishes in managing decommissioning to completion.

Antinuclear positions often stress that inadequate decommissioning organizations (e.g., using obsolete industrial models or untrained staff) downgrade the role of nuclear energy in regard to sustainable development. However, experience shows that nuclear activities managed within a sound industrial framework convey a small industrial risk and modest impacts on the stakeholders (while ensuring the interests of the general public, respectful use of the environment, socio-economic progress, etc.).

In regard to sustainability, inadequate organizational aspects that could be identified in the course of decommissioning should be corrected as soon as possible after their occurrence to prevent recurrence. In other terms, organizational effectiveness and efficiency occurring in planning for or implementing decommissioning are viewed as indicators of sustainability. This is the very focus of the book.

The confirmation of accomplished sustainability is not easy. While there is general agreement on the concept of sustainability, its actual meaning and the principles needed to achieve it in practice are much fuzzier and less well defined. There are many levels at which sustainability principles are currently being set, international organizations, national and local governments, industry sectors, and individual businesses. The potential for contradictions and inconsistencies is significant, and uncertainty is inevitable, given the scale of sustainability. This is particularly relevant for the decommissioning of nuclear facilities where we are dealing with a wide range of issues from the impact of removing jobs from local communities to the transgenerational impacts of managing and storing radioactive waste (Bonser, 2006).

The following highlights the links between the general concept of sustainability, e.g., as summarized in (WEF, 2014), and the proper approach to D&ER as delineated in this book. Throughout this book, the reader will note the underlying links to the three pillars of sustainability: economic development, social progress, and environmental protection. It is even more difficult to prove a relationship between sustainability and the subsets of decommissioning covered by this book (organization and management; costs; and human resources). For example, the three boxes deriving from Our People, namely Culture and Values, Comprehensive Development, and Training and Development on the left-hand side of Fig. 2.1 could be considered—in a qualitative and perhaps controversial way—as matching, respectively, Chapters. 5, 6, and 7 of this book.

The activities associated with decommissioning a nuclear facility can vary widely. They may include large-scale decontamination works, demolition of massive concrete structures, or enclosing the facility in a safe configuration so as to allow the radioactivity to decay naturally to acceptable levels. On the other end, small laboratories in which radionuclides have been used may be fully decommissioned after some modest cleanout activities. In all cases, the decommissioning process addresses the structures, systems, and components (SSC) of a facility. Additionally, the site (land areas) around a nuclear facility is often contaminated as the result of facility's operation: soil clean-up generally goes under the name of environmental remediation (ER). Work carried out under decommissioning and environmental remediation (D&ER) programs is accordingly aimed at achieving end states that set the basis for planned or anticipated (future) end-uses (i.e., facility and/or site redevelopment). Decommissioning and site remediation programs share resources and several activities. And the organization responsible for the D&ER project should be shaped to achieve these objectives in a safe, socially responsive, timely, and cost-effective manner, all terms identifying sustainability.

Figure 2.1  Sustainability strategy. Credit to ClauLata, Wiki Commons.

The concept of Life Cycle Management (LCM) can be described as the process of managing the entire life-cycle of a product from its conception, through design and manufacture to service and eventual disposal. LCM is a methodology used successfully in various industries to reduce the waste generated from a stream or process in order to lower costs, optimize production, and increase the value of the business. In addition, LCM can provide an additional benefit for ongoing or planned projects in reducing the extent of end-of-life D&ER. LCM is one typical way of including sustainability in a nuclear project.

While recognizing the link between decommissioning and environmental remediation, this book focuses on the former as a source of relevant cases; however, a few circumstances originating from contaminated land around nuclear installations and impacting the decommissioning process at large have been quoted to confirm the link.

The interactions between sustainability and decommissioning can be represented in Table 2.1. As said earlier, the representative indicator of sustainability as adopted by this book is the organizational response to managing the D&ER project/program and any incurred issues/solutions (boxed entry in Table 2.1).

Principles to guide the decommissioning process need to be defined beforehand. They may reflect the objectives of a country that are expected to be applied across all activities—nuclear or nonnuclear; sustainability is deemed currently as one of these important objectives. Organizational structures and practices can then be established that turn these objectives and other high-level commitments into a frame within which decommissioning strategies can be planned and implemented.

Table 2.1

(author's elaboration from Bonser, 2006).

Based on established policies and strategies, decision-makers of nuclear facilities are required to consider decommissioning at the earliest possible stage. Indeed, operating organizations are required to prepare and maintain a decommissioning plan throughout the service life of the facility.

With many nuclear installations approaching the end of operating life or already shutdown, many countries are faced with finalizing strategies and drafting decommissioning plans. However, the approach to decommissioning varies from country to country. This is due to the range of expertise available and the differing political and economic factors. In general, it can be stated that technology exists to ensure that decommissioning projects can be effectively and efficiently completed. However, timeliness and cost-effectiveness are not always optimal due to organizational or economic factors. It has been noted on several occasions that the major weakness in decommissioning projects is poor or inadequate management, including factors such as unclear identification of roles and responsibilities, lack of clarity on objectives, uncertain funding, or untrained/poorly motivated employees (all of these factors being the focus of this book). This can be unfortunately true even in fully industrialized countries. The growing maturity of well-established, responsive, and flexible organizations is expected to reduce these concerns in nuclear decommissioning.

As said earlier, it is hard to prove the sustainability of decommissioning projects and even harder to attribute sustainability to the availability and functions of decommissioning organizations. However, there are dedicated teams monitoring the sustainability of decommissioning projects and rewarding the best achievements.

The US Department of Energy Office of Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management (DOE-EM) is an organization heavily involved in D&ER projects. Sustainability at DOE-EM means making improvements in the areas of: environmental, energy, water, waste management, and economic performance, which is expected to bring positive impacts to the involved sites and their local communities. EM promotes sustainability, natural/cultural resource preservation, and the integration of sustainable practices within its management functions and mission activities. Infrastructure resilience at EM implies focusing on organizations that identify and respond to events/situations that can disrupt, strain, or compromise activities and infrastructure.

For example, the DOE Sustainability Awards acknowledge, reward, and encourage achievements that advance excellent sustainability practices at DOE sites and laboratories. One decommissioning-related award was given in 2019 to Savannah River Site (SRS). SRS has an established Small Unmanned Aircraft System (sUAS) program to capture video of entombed reactor facilities on-site to ensure long-term integrity of the structures. This program allows for a much more complete inspection than performed in the past with traditional helicopters, at half the cost. Aerial inspection of the decommissioned reactor building using a sUAS is a cost-effective option that allows for a quick inspection of the area, making them ideal for critical inspections while decreasing emissions, noise, and using no fossil fuels (DOE, 2019).

Another decommissioning-related Sustainability Award was given by DOE-EM in 2018 to the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). The Laboratory won an honourable mention for Innovative Approach to Sustainability for its Bio-based Lubricant Used in Metal Cutting Operations Identified as Waste Diversion Strategy project. LANL's Maintenance & Site Services welding shop replaced traditional oil-based lubricants with a bio-based lubricant for use on metal-cutting machinery. The new lubricant is 100% biodegradable, nontoxic, and formulated from water and renewable plant-based oils. LANL transitioned from using 200L of oil to just 4L of bio-based lubricant during 2017. The lab is saving approximately $5000 per year in spent oil disposal costs (DOE, 2018).

Needless to say, these awards prove that the responsible organizations have incorporated the various sustainability aspects in decommissioning-related functions.

References

1. Bonser D. Sustainability principles: a practical move toward tomorrow? In: IBC's 10th Global Conference & Exhibition. London: Decommissioning of Nuclear Facilities; November 2006:20–22.

2. US Department of Energy, . U.S. Department of Energy Sustainability Award Winners. 2018. https://www.energy.gov/management/spd/2018-us-department-energy-sustainability-award-winners.

3. US Department of Energy, . U.S. Department of Energy Sustainability Award Winners. 2019. https://www.energy.gov/management/spd/2019-us-department-energy-sustainability-award-winners.

4. United Nations, . Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. 2015. https://sdgs.un.org/2030agenda.

5. The World Energy Foundation, . A Brief History of Sustainability. August 20, 2014. https://theworldenergyfoundation.org/a-brief-history-of-sustainability/.

Chapter 3: The structure of this book

project management, costs and funding, assessing, and upgrading human resources

Abstract

Following a general description of decommissioning activities and phases, this chapter expands briefly on the role played by the project organization and management, as extensively described in guidance textbooks. By contrast, this book addresses a great deal of case studies and derives lessons of general applicability from them. The structure of the book is indicated here.

Keywords

Case studies; Decommissioning; Management; Organizational activities; Planning; Project

Nuclear decommissioning is a complex process involving activities such as detailed surveys, decontamination and dismantling of plant equipment, systems and structures, and management of waste and other materials, while taking into account health and safety of the decommissioning crew and the general public and protection of the environment. Accurate planning and management is vital to ensure that decommissioning is accomplished safely and cost-effectively. It should be remarked in general that published information on organizational and managerial aspects of decommissioning is relatively scarce in comparison with that on technological aspects. This can be due to overemphasizing the technological aspects of decommissioning as they are perceived to be more critical to success: although this could have been true in the early development of the decommissioning industry, it is generally accepted now that decommissioning technologies have reached a maturity sufficient to address almost all aspects of decommissioning. However, organization and management of decommissioning programs/projects have appeared in many cases to be somehow deficient and deserving attention. An improved management of organizational aspects may lead to better decision-making, reductions in time and resources, lower doses to the workers, and lower impact on public health and comfort including the general environment.

The objective of most reference books (e.g., the IAEA Nuclear Energy Series or Safety Standards) is to provide guidance on the organization and management aspects for the decommissioning of large nuclear installations, which will be useful for licensees responsible for discharging these responsibilities. These books identify the general issues to be addressed and provide an overview of organizational activities crucial to manage decommissioning activities in a safe, timely, and cost-effective manner. Information about actual cases is provided in support of that general guidance. However, as noted elsewhere, the Nuclear Decommissioning Case Studies series—of which this book is vol. 5—takes a different path: it draws the reader's attention to well over 100 individual case studies (including sections, text boxes, and supported by references), which can be used in a sort of bottom-up mode to derive overarching guidance. Through the use of many case studies, this book strives to draw the reader's attention to aspects that may go largely ignored.

As said earlier, case studies given in this book are structured in three categories:

• Organizational structures and management approaches (chapter 5);

• Cost and funding issues (chapter 6); and

• Use of human resources (chapter 7).

More details about this structure are given in the preambles to these three chapters.

Chapter 4: Errors, mishaps, inadequacies