Beyond Decommissioning: the Redevelopment of Nuclear Facilities and Sites

Front Cover......Page 1
Beyond Decommissioning: The reuse and redevelopment of nuclear installations......Page 4
Copyright......Page 5
Contents......Page 6
Preface......Page 10
Disclaimer......Page 16
Dedication......Page 18
Chapter 1: Introduction......Page 20
 References......Page 33
Chapter 2: The fundamentals of industrial redevelopment......Page 34
 2.1. Adaptive reuse......Page 36
 2.2. Industrial heritage......Page 39
 2.3. The link and tension between preservation and adaptive reuse......Page 52
 2.4. The museums......Page 58
 2.5. Indicators of success......Page 60
 2.6. Knowledge management......Page 62
 2.7. Change management......Page 68
 2.8. The aesthetic factor......Page 70
 References......Page 74
Chapter 3: Early planning, preparatory steps, crucial decisions, implementation, and beyond: the phases of redevelopment......Page 78
 3.1. Decommissioning to brownfield for repowering or sale/redevelopment......Page 88
 3.2. Decommissioning to greenfield for sale or redevelopment......Page 89
 References......Page 91
Chapter 4: Redevelopment as an innovative approach to nuclear decommissioning......Page 94
 4.1. Sustainability......Page 96
 ``Preservation......Page 98
 ``Restoration......Page 99
 ``Reconstruction......Page 100
 4.3. Challenges to reusing nuclear sites......Page 101
 4.4. Designing a nuclear facility to become part of the local community......Page 102
 References......Page 105
Chapter 5: Relevant factors for redevelopment......Page 108
 5.1. The economics......Page 110
 5.2. The public and other stakeholders......Page 115
 5.3. Staff and skills......Page 120
 5.4. Ownership, sponsors, and stewardship......Page 122
 5.5. Radiological and non-radiological criteria for the end state......Page 124
 5.6. Long-term site mission......Page 133
 5.7. Interim use......Page 136
 5.8. Age and conditions of facility......Page 139
 5.9. Key assets......Page 142
 5.10. Project risks......Page 146
  5.10.2. Uncertain liabilities......Page 147
  5.10.3. Unclear procedures......Page 148
 References......Page 149
Chapter 6: Experience and lessons learned......Page 154
 6.1. Power plant sites and large industrial complexes, including land areas and infrastructure......Page 155
  6.1.1. Savannah River Site, SC, USA......Page 156
  6.1.2. Connecticut Yankee NPP, CT, USA (Cooper, 2015)......Page 158
  6.1.4. Indian Point NPP, NY, USA (Lohud, 2018)......Page 160
  6.1.6. Windsor Site, CT, USA......Page 161
  6.1.8. Gas Works, Toronto, Canada......Page 162
  6.1.9. Sesto San Giovanni, Italy......Page 163
  6.1.10. Release of UK´s nuclear sites (WNN, 2012a,b)......Page 164
  6.1.11. Chernobyl Site, Ukraine (Leister et al., 2005)......Page 166
 6.2. Large buildings......Page 167
  6.2.1. Power plants......Page 168
   6.2.1.1. BONUS NPP, Puerto Rico......Page 170
   6.2.1.2. Fort St Vrain and SM-1A NPPs, USA......Page 171
   6.2.1.3. Shoreham NPP, NY, USA......Page 173
   6.2.1.5. Berkeley NPP, UK to host a college......Page 174
   6.2.1.7. Liverpool Power Station, NSW, Australia......Page 175
   6.2.1.9. The Trojhalí site, Czech Republic......Page 176
   6.2.1.10. Electricity Museum and other redevelopments at Lisbon, Portugal......Page 178
   6.2.1.12. Battersea Power Station, London, United Kingdom......Page 180
   6.2.1.13. Reuse of buildings within decommissioning projects......Page 181
   6.2.1.14. Reuse of nuclear canyons......Page 183
   6.2.1.15. Electrical substations......Page 184
  6.2.2. Nonpower plants......Page 185
   6.2.2.1. Mills, sheds, other factories......Page 188
   6.2.2.2. Water pumping houses......Page 197
   6.2.2.3. Industrial silos......Page 198
   6.2.2.5. Postindustrial living in Milan, Italy......Page 201
   6.2.2.6. Rome industrial buildings......Page 202
   6.2.2.7. Tobacco factories......Page 205
   6.2.2.8. OPEC 1 and 2, Casaccia Research Center, Rome, Italy......Page 209
   6.2.2.9. Automobile plants......Page 210
   6.2.2.11. Clementhorpe Maltings, York, UK......Page 211
   6.2.2.13. Kurashiki Factory, Okayama Prefecture, Japan......Page 212
   6.2.2.15. Officine Grandi Riparazioni, Turin, Italy......Page 213
   6.2.2.16. Manufacturing buildings reused for biotech, medical and chemistry facilities, and supportive uses......Page 214
  6.2.3. Railway stations and ancillary installations......Page 220
   6.2.3.3. Michigan Central Station, Detroit, MI, USA......Page 221
   6.2.3.5. Fulham Broadway, London, UK......Page 223
  6.2.4. Gasholders......Page 224
 6.3. Bunkers, tunnels, and other underground installations......Page 226
 6.4. Contaminated land areas......Page 237
  6.4.2. From dumps to parks......Page 239
  6.4.3. Crawick Multiverse, UK......Page 240
  6.4.4. Tempelhof Airport, Berlin, Germany......Page 241
  6.4.5. Mining lands......Page 242
 6.5. Research reactors and other small facilities......Page 245
  6.5.2. Georgia Tech Reactor and building, GA, USA (WM, 2001)......Page 246
  6.5.3. Georgia Nuclear Aircraft Laboratory (GNAL) (McClure, n.d.)......Page 247
  6.5.5. Reactor Maintenance, Assembly, and Disassembly (R-MAD) Facility, Nevada National Security Site (NNSS), USA (Primro .........Page 248
  6.5.6. Building 305, Hanford, WA, USA (Gerber, 1993)......Page 249
  6.5.7. RB-3 Reactor, Montecuccolino (Bologna) Italy (UNIBO, 2012)......Page 250
  6.5.9. Research Reactor, Helmholtz Zentrum Munich (Rehs, 2018)......Page 251
  6.5.10. Musashi Reactor, Japan (Musahi et al., 2008)......Page 252
  6.5.11. Nuclear Reactor, Sweden (Zublin, 2016)......Page 253
  6.5.12. Korea Research Reactor No.1 (Seong et al., 2017)......Page 254
  6.5.13. BR3 Reactor, Mol, Belgium (Noynaert and Verstraeten, 2007)......Page 255
  6.5.15. University of Washington Reactor WA, USA (Save The Reactor, 2016)......Page 256
  6.5.17. Building 413 Active Laundry, Harwell, UK (Atyeo, 2010)......Page 257
  6.6.1. Water towers......Page 258
  6.6.3. Observatories......Page 260
  6.6.4. Industrial chimneys......Page 261
  6.6.5. Cooling towers......Page 266
  6.6.6. Air traffic control towers......Page 267
  6.6.7. Roofs......Page 268
  6.6.9. Flak towers......Page 270
   6.7.1.1. Mutsu nuclear ship, Japan (Mutsu, 1996)......Page 271
   6.7.1.2. Nuclear Ship Savannah, US (Maritime Park Association, 2013) (Lange, 1990)......Page 272
   6.7.1.3. Otto Hahn nuclear ship, Germany (Brenk, 2010)......Page 273
   6.7.1.4. Submarine bases......Page 274
  6.7.2. Pools and tanks......Page 275
  6.7.3. Docks, piers, wharves......Page 279
  6.7.4. Cranes and crane ways......Page 282
   6.7.5.1. Railroads......Page 283
   6.7.5.2. Roads......Page 289
   6.7.5.3. Viaduct arches......Page 292
   6.7.5.4. Parking lots and garages......Page 295
 References......Page 296
 7.1. Rancho Seco NPP redevelopment......Page 314
 7.2. SATSOP redevelopment......Page 315
 7.3. The Superfund program......Page 317
  7.3.2. The Ottawa Radiation Area, IL (US Environmental Protection Agency, 2017a)......Page 318
  7.3.5. The golf courses (US Environmental Protection Agency, 2003)......Page 324
  7.3.6. Hunters Point Naval Shipyard, CA (San Francisco Chronicle, 2015)......Page 325
  7.3.7. Denver Radium Case Study, CO (US Environmental Protection Agency, 2017d)......Page 326
  7.3.8. The Fernald Feed Materials Production Center, OH......Page 327
 7.5. Yankee Rowe NPP, MA (Hamilton et al., 2005)......Page 331
 7.6. Nuclear Lake, NY, United States......Page 334
 7.7. Chapelcross NPP, United Kingdom (Dumfries and Galloway, 2017)......Page 335
 7.9. Winfrith, United Kingdom-From Nuclear RandD Site to Science and Technology Park......Page 336
 7.10. Harwell Southern Storage Area, United Kingdom......Page 339
 7.11. Dounreay Site Remediation, United Kingdom......Page 342
 7.12. Experience from decommissioning at ÚJV, Czech Republic (Podlaha and Tous, 2017)......Page 345
 7.13. Barsebäck NPP, Sweden......Page 346
  7.14.1. Construction work control processes must address latent field conditions, Oak Ridge Site, United States [US Depar .........Page 348
  7.14.2. Discovery highlights the potential of encountering unknown/unanticipated materials and hazards, Oak Ridge Site, U .........Page 349
  7.14.3. Establish credibility prior to relying too heavily on historical data, Oak Ridge Site, United States [US Departme .........Page 350
  7.14.5. Moving records into vaults after transition, Portsmouth, OH, United States [US Department of Energy, lessons lear .........Page 351
  7.14.6. Proper storage and maintenance of records, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA, United States [ .........Page 352
  7.14.7. Communication of changes in regulatory requirements, Oak Ridge Site, United States [US Department of Energy, less .........Page 353
  7.14.8. Redevelopment and reuse complicated by drains legacy, United Kingdom (International Atomic Energy Agency, 2011)......Page 354
  7.14.10. Abandoned energized 120-V electrical line found during backfill operations, Los Alamos National Laboratory (U.S. .........Page 355
  7.14.11. Demolition of historic and yet-to-be-determined radar towers at TTR without completing required NEPA process (U. .........Page 356
  7.14.13. Cut buried conduit/cable, Y12 National Security Complex, United States (U.S. Department of Energy, 2018c)......Page 357
 References......Page 358
Chapter 8: Conclusions and recommendations......Page 362
Glossary......Page 364
Acronyms......Page 374
Additional Bibliography (websites accessed on 29 December 2018)......Page 378
Index......Page 384
Back Cover......Page 396