Page 81 - Beyond Decommissioning

62 Beyond Decommissioning

Many case studies are assessed in this study: based on selected indicators and their
relative impacts (weights), a scoring system is created to assess the adaptability to
reuse of existing buildings.
Cantell (2005) articulates a reuse/redevelopment project in planning, preparatory,
execution, and longer-term phases. During these phases the project is gradually being
detailed and led to implementation. This book has re-phrased the proposed phases of
Cantell (2005) in:

(1) early planning
(2) stabilization
(3) identification and acquisition of resources
(4) property transfer (or demolition followed by land transfer)
(5) longer-term revitalization policies
These phases are the essential steps for creating an integrated approach to revitalizing
unused properties and for structuring the process from deterioration to successful revi-
talization. Local authorities can use this scheme to review redevelopment programs.
In order for site decommissioning and release to remain consistent with business
objectives, site owners should evaluate in depth the transfer of site title and assets, and
site reuse implications early in the decommissioning planning process. There are four
main reasons for this strategic approach:
– finding a release/reuse pathway consistent with business objectives implies the involvement
of a good deal of regulatory, political, municipal, and community stakeholders with a
diverse—often conflicting—range of interests: the harmonization of different interests
and concerns takes time;
– major stakeholder issues are not always those that site owners expected at the onset of
decommissioning planning and may vary in the course of decommissioning: therefore, to
minimize unexpected issues an integrated review of all site release and reuse aspects and
their mutual interactions is essential to determine the optimal course of action;
– at the end of D&ER, site acceptance will depend on site characterization and
decommissioning/remediation activities well beyond the issues addressed by regulatory
requirements; and,
– site reuse and end state configurations are fully related to site release criteria and the way
these have been communicated and made understandable to the stakeholders.
First, the owner should characterize the facility both physically and in terms of its haz-
ardous inventory (radiological, chemical, etc.). One significant issue is the contami-
nation of the subsoil, which is generally attributable to previous operations, waste
dumps, or wartime effects (e.g., unexploded aerial bombs or landmines). Chronic con-
tamination is generally caused by subsoil-related factors. The other aspect is the use of
hazardous and harmful materials in construction. An accurate survey will serve to
define the decommissioning/remediation program and the estimated state of the facil-
ity/site for subsequent reuse. Particularly critical is the location of its hazardous con-
tents and of structural weaknesses. Reference reports have been published for
characterization of nuclear facilities (International Atomic Energy Agency, 1998a;
OECD/Nuclear Energy Agency, 2013) and nuclear sites (International Atomic
Energy Agency, 1998b). For toxic contamination in both nuclear and nonnuclear