Advertisement

Advancing Risk Management in Nuclear Power Plant EPC Projects: An Empirical Evaluation of Risk Management Practices on Steam Generator Replacement Projects

  • Sola M. TalabiEmail author
  • Paul Fishchbeck
Conference paper
  • 1.4k Downloads
Part of the Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering book series (LNME)

Abstract

The nuclear power industry has historically been plagued with new plant deployment risks for engineering procurement and construction (EPC); project cost and schedule overruns present a risk to investors. These risks are anticipated to continue to hinder the growth of the nuclear industry, due to expected increased regulatory requirements due to the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant incident in March 2011. Although several risk management practices have been put in place, considerable cost and schedule excursions have continued to occur in the construction of recent nuclear power plant projects. We identify the limitations with current risk management practices by assessing the level of completeness of risk identification and accuracy of risk assessments on prior steam generator replacement (SGR) projects. SGR projects were chosen for this evaluation because their scope of work is characteristic of large nuclear power plant EPC projects.

Keywords

Supply Chain Nuclear Power Plant International Atomic Energy Agency Risk Identification Energy Information Administration 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgments

This paper was developed as research conducted at Carnegie Mellon University’s Department of Engineering and Public Policy. The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support provided by the Department.

References

  1. 1.
    International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) (1988) Nuclear power project-management. A Guide Book, pp 10–12Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kerzner H (2009) Project-management: a systems approach to planning, scheduling, and controlling. Wiley, OH, pp 57–63 (10th d. Berea)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kline A, Renn O (2002) A new approach to risk evaluation and management: risk-based, precaution-based, and discourse-based strategies. Risk Anal 22(6):17–18Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    KPMG International Cooperative (2009) Construction risk in new nuclear power projects—Eyes Wide Open, pp 3–5Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Levitt R (2011) Toward project-management 2.0. CRGP Working paper #0066:36-37Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Morris P (2011) Updating the project-management bodies of knowledge. Center for Research in the Management of Projects, pp 23–24Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Project-management Institute, PMI (2009) Construction extension to the PMBOK guide, Chap. 11. Risk-management, pp 34–35Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Southworth FH et al (2003) The next generation nuclear plant (NGNP) project. Idaho National Engineering & Environmental Laboratory, Global, pp 12–23Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Voetsch RJ (2004) The current state of project risk-management practices among risk sensitive project-management professionals. George Washington University PhD, AAT 3112236, pp 2–3Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Walewski J, Gibson G (2003) International project risk assessment: methods, procedures, and critical factors. A Report of the Center for Construction Industry Studies, The University of Texas at Austin, pp 13–14Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Du Y, Parsons JE (2009) Update on the cost of nuclear power. MIT, Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research, pp 43–44Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Engineering and Public PolicyCarnegie Mellon UniversityPittsburghUSA

Personalised recommendations