Page 353 - Beyond Decommissioning

Case studies of nuclear redevelopment 329

The regional museum of Kristianstad wrote a report on the importance of
Barseb€ ack for the Swedish industry, and called it a cultural landmark. They write,
“The plant symbolizes the nuclear power debate, one of the most important societal
issues of our time. It reminds us both of the prerequisites for the development of Swed-
ish welfare, that is access to energy, and of the resistance to nuclear power and count-
less protests that were carried out here” (World Resources Forum 2013).

7.14 Case histories and lessons learned

The power of illustrative anecdotes often lies not in how well they present reality, but
in how well they reflect the core beliefs of their audience.
David P. Mikkelson, Snopes.com, 04-10-04

The following examples present lessons learned from redevelopment projects
including where the selected options turned out later to be impracticable. Cursory
technical details are given for each project, which feature a description of the prob-
lems encountered in redeveloping facilities/sites. Although the situations described
are somehow typical, by no means is the information presented intended to be exhaus-
tive of the issues that can arise in redevelopment projects. The reader is encouraged to
evaluate the applicability of these lessons learned to projects of his/her specific
concern.

7.14.1 Construction work control processes must address
latent field conditions, Oak Ridge Site, United States
[US Department of Energy, lessons learned data base #:
L-1997-OR-LMESCENT-0601 (available upon DOE
authorization)]

Problem Encountered: In July 1995, at the initial start of a construction project, work
activities involving the removal of five underground waste and process lines to facil-
itate installation of a new tank vault were initiated. Initial site characterization iden-
tified the pipeline contents to be typical waste/sludge mixture of alpha and beta/
gamma isotopes. Additionally, the surrounding soil was identified to be potentially
Category 2 soil (contaminated but below 5 mrem/h–50 uSv/h dose rate). Field surveys
by the Construction Manager (CM) Health Physics (HP) technicians, during the initial
excavation, identified the soil surrounding the pipe lines to have dose rates up to 900
mrem/h (9mSv/h), which prompted recategorizing the soil as Category 3 soil (i.e.,
contaminated and >5 mrem/h 50μSv/h dose rate). The presence of CM HP techni-
cians is a requirement during excavation activities until such time as initial character-
ization results can be confirmed or as otherwise might be required by radiological
conditions. The discovery of the Category 3 soil required the CM to accelerate the
development of its “as low as reasonably achievable” (ALARA) plan to address exca-
vation activities in addition to the plan’s previous scope of addressing pipe cutting
operations. Also, during the initial excavation, a drain line was found in a location
different than that shown on the design drawings. The CM work control process