New Issues Emerge

  • Michele Laraia
Part of the Lecture Notes in Energy book series (LNEN, volume 66)


With the accomplished maturity in nuclear decommissioning, problems emerged that had been somehow set aside when technology was the main driver to success. First it emerged that organizational and managerial factors had somehow been disregarded in the past and needed much improvement: issues such as the licensee-contractor interactions and the proper supervision of contractors needed a solution. As a significant example of this category of factors, the Appendix tells the evolution (still in progress) of decommissioning cost estimates from preliminary, rough estimates and attempts at establishing simple correlations between costs and construction/operational parameters, to detailed “bottom-up” approaches which are the rule nowadays.


  1. Atomic Industrial Forum, Inc. (AIF) (1986) Guidelines for producing commercial nuclear power plant decommissioning cost estimates. AIF/NESP-036Google Scholar
  2. Health and Safety Executive/Scottish Environment Protection Agency (HSE/SEPA) (1998) Safety audit of dounreay 1998—some lessons for both UKAEA and NII, NuSAC (2002), p 18.
  3. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) (2000) Organization and management for decommissioning of large nuclear facilities, Technical Reports Series No 399, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  4. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) (2004a) Transition from operation to decommissioning of nuclear installations, Technical Reports Series No 420, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  5. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) (2004b) Safety considerations in the transition from operation to decommissioning of nuclear facilities, Safety Reports Series No 36, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  6. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) (2008) Managing the socioeconomic impact of the decommissioning of nuclear facilities, Technical Reports Series No 464, IAEA, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  7. Kaczmarsky MM, Odell WH (2000) The successful transition from plant operations to decommissioning at Maine Yankee. In: WM’00 Conference, Waste Management Symposia. Tucson, AZ, 27 Feb–2 Mar 2000.
  8. Mcgrath R (2011) Factors affecting decommissioning costs. In: EPRI International Decommissioning and Radioactive Waste Workshop. Lund, Sweden, 20 Sept 2011Google Scholar
  9. OECD Nuclear Energy Agency, International Atomic Energy Agency, European Commission (ISDC) (2012) International structure for decommissioning costing (ISDC) of nuclear installations, NEA, ParisGoogle Scholar
  10. OECD/Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) (1991) Decommissioning of nuclear facilities: an analysis of the variability of decommissioning costs estimates, NEA, ParisGoogle Scholar
  11. OECD Nuclear Energy Agency, International Atomic Energy Agency, European Commission (NEA) (1999) Nuclear decommissioning: a proposed standardized list of items for costing purposes, Interim Technical Document, OECD/NEA, ParisGoogle Scholar
  12. OECD/NEA (NEA)(2016) Costs of decommissioning nuclear power plants, NEA, ParisGoogle Scholar
  13. OECD Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) (2017) Addressing uncertainties in cost estimates for decommissioning nuclear facilities, NEA, ParisGoogle Scholar
  14. The Financial Times Limited (FT) (2017) UK set to end outsourcing of nuclear clean-up. Decommissioning atomic reactors set to be brought in house after contract collapses, 15 Oct 2017. (available upon subscription)Google Scholar
  15. US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) (1978) DECOST-computer routine for decommissioning cost and funding analysis, NUREG-0514.
  16. US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) (2004) Standard review plan for decommissioning cost estimates for nuclear power reactors, NUREG-1713.
  17. US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) (2013) Staff findings on the table of minimum amounts required to demonstrate decommissioning funding assurance, SECY-13-0066, 20 June 2013.
  18. US Department of Energy, List of directives.

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michele Laraia
    • 1
  1. 1.Independent ConsultantRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations