Abstract
The decommissioning of nuclear facilities provides good examples of stakeholder issues and concerns and approaches to resolution. Nuclear power stations, licensed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), typically strive for license termination conditions that would permit unrestricted use of the site so that, in some cases, reutilization of the site would be possible for a specific use. Former nuclear weapons production facilities are decommissioned to a variety of end states, consistent with the ongoing mission of the site. In all cases, stakeholder concerns must be factored into the decision and the overseeing agencies, the NRC, the Department of Energy (DOE), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and State oversight agencies must be sensitive to their concerns.
In this chapter, we provide an overview of decommissioning activities, the types of facilities undergoing decommissioning and the different regulatory frameworks. Desired end states are discussed along with stakeholder concerns and issues. Examples of drivers and constraints for major decommissioning decision factors are examined. We end with a selected case study – the decommissioning of the Big Rock Point nuclear power station and lessons learned from this and other decommissioning activities.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Currently, the DOE defines D&D as “Deactivation and Decommissioning,” although in the past D&D referred to “Decontamination and Decommissioning.” Definitions for these and other important decommissioning activities are provided in subsequent sections of this chapter. The American Nuclear Society uses the term Decommissioning, Decontamination and Reutilization in recognition of the fact that, in many cases, the land and possibly some of the structures can be continued to be used in a productive way.
References
Clarke JH, Powers CW, and Kosson DS (2010) Development of a Risk-Informed Approach to Setting D&D Priorities. American Nuclear Society Topical Meeting and Technology Expo on Decommissioning, Decontamination & Reutilization, Idaho Falls, ID August 2010
Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10 Part 20 SubpartE Radiological Criteria for License Termination.
Collazo YT, Szilagyi AP, Frush SA et al (2010) Office of Deactivation and Decommissioning and Facility Engineering 2010 Prioritized Technology Initiatives to Improve D&D Operations., Waste Management 2010
Department of Energy, Office of Environmental Management, Congressional Budget Request for FY 2011. http://www.cfo.doe.gov/budget/11budget/Content/FY2011%20Highlights.%20pdf Accessed 24 August 2010
DOE (2009) Facility Deactivation & Decommissioning Appendix B-D&D Project Basics, (http://www.em.doe.gov/EM20Pages/Presentations.aspx) Accessed 24 August 2010
Hannah R (2010) P Area Operable Unit (PAOU) and R Area Operable Unit (RAOU) Update, presented by Ray Hannah to the Savannah River Site Citizens Advisory Board, October 5, 2010
NRC (2009) Status of the Decommissioning Program, Annual Report, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/commission/secys/2009/secy2009-0167/2009-0167scy.pdf Accessed 24 August 2010
NRC (2006a) NUREG 1757, Consolidated NMSS Decommissioning Guidance v1 rev.2 Decommissioning Process for Materials Licensees, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555–0001
NRC (2006b) NUREG 1757, Consolidated NMSS Decommissioning Guidance v2 rev. 1 Characterization, Survey, and Determination of Radiological Criteria, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555–0001
NRC (2003a) NUREG 1757, Consolidated NMSS Decommissioning Guidance v3 Financial Assurance, Recordkeeping, and Timeliness, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555–0001
NRC (2003b) NUREG 1700, rev. 1 Standard Review Plan for Evaluating Nuclear Power Reactor License Termination Plans, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555–0001
NRC Fact Sheet on Decommissioning Nuclear Power Plants, (2010) http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/decommissioning.html Accessed 1 September 2010
Watson B et al (2010) Power Reactor Decommissioning – Regulatory Experience From Trojan to Rancho Seco and Plants In-Between. American Nuclear Society Topical Meeting and Technology Expo on Decommissioning, Decontamination & Reutilization, Idaho Falls, ID August 2010
Acknowledgments
We acknowledge support from the Department of Energy through Grant Number DE-FRC01-06EW07053 to the Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation
We acknowledge helpful discussions with James Shepherd and Robert Johnson from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission; Wade Whitaker and Ray Hannah (DOE Savannah River Site); Matt McCormick (DOE Hanford Site); Moses Jaraysi and Kurt Kehler (CH2M CPR Group at Hanford); and Paula Kirk and Andy Szilagyi (DOE EM Headquarters).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Clarke, J.H., Burger, J., Powers, C.W., Kosson, D.S. (2011). Decommissioning of Nuclear Facilities and Stakeholder Concerns. In: Burger, J. (eds) Stakeholders and Scientists. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-8813-3_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-8813-3_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4419-8812-6
Online ISBN: 978-1-4419-8813-3
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)