Link to the study - European Parliament - Europa
Link to the study - European Parliament - Europa Link to the study - European Parliament - Europa
Policy Department D: Budgetary Affairs ____________________________________________________________________________________________ An analysis of cost development is shown in the Figure 44. The operator expects an increase of costs for the period 2016-2020 which is comparable to all expenses spent until 2014 (see Figure 44). Figure 44: The time development of the total costs Source: (JAVYS 2013) 4.7.2. Comparison and evaluation of cost estimates The listed cost estimates for all three countries are performed with state-of-the-art methodology. They are all based on the recent decommissioning plan, on project management plans and underlying material and work structures. They are state-of-the-art and comparable to the methodology used in the two identified best practices. Two issues are best addressed in the Lithuania example: Cost escalation is calculated, like identified as important in the EDF case; Risks are accounted for and their influence on total costs is estimated. 4.7.3. Recommendations on cost estimates Cost estimates are based on state-of-the-art. To further increase their reliability and usefulness, cost escalation and risks should be included in future estimates. 4.8. WORKFORCE As identified in the two best practice examples, the issues concerning the workforce have to be included in an assessment because of the influence of psychological factors, the long-term perspective and the issues of knowledge and skills management. 122
Nuclear Decommissioning: Management of Costs and Risks ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 4.8.1. Workforce aspects in the decommissioning projects In respect to workforce issues, the best practice is to: Work as much as possible with own experienced persons that have insider knowledge on the facility and its operating history; Overcome inner barriers and manage changes in the perspective of those; Increase and train knowledge and skills of those towards decommissioning. Bulgaria Bulgaria chose a different way to restructure the workforce needed for decommissioning. After transferring the ownership of Unit 1 and 2 in 2008 to the organisation DP RAO (see chapter 4.4.1) the respective unit in this organisation was set up. The staff at that time was very small and did not include workforce personnel. Only after the Kozloduy Units 1 and 2 received the license as installations for the management of radioactive wastes in 2010, around 100 'specialists', former employees of the NPP, were also transferred to DP RAO (DP RAO 2013). According to different insiders, at that time most of the employees did not see this as an attractive future opportunity and DP RAO not as an attractive employer so that the risk of losing knowledge and experience was very high. Only after the transfer of Units 3 and 4 followed in 2012 the situation improved. In ANNEX 3 the more technical aspects are described (in answering to the aspects 'acceptance of the new targets, job satisfaction, self-complacency, expert excellence' in question), so that the respective aspects cannot be evaluated. The named training courses in ANNEX 3 show that it has been recognized what re-qualification means and how valuable improved skills and knowledge is. Lithuania The minutes of the meeting (as documented in ANNEX 4) report about a very long period that it took to overcome previous structures, to adapt to the new tasks and to see decommissioning as a new challenge. This process is described as 'still ongoing', but majorly settled. In the meantime new personnel, that is not familiar with the operating habits, is employed and contributes to progress in this field. About 5 000 employees were employed during operation (ANNEX 4), while 2 053 employees worked at INPP on 2 January 2013 (INPP 2013b). Most of today's employees stem from the operational phase. Remarkably are the efforts to adapt a set of safety culture indicators, which were already developed and implemented in the operational phase, to the specific needs and conditions in the decommissioning phase. 123
- Page 73 and 74: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 75 and 76: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 77 and 78: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 79 and 80: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 81 and 82: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 83 and 84: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 85 and 86: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 87 and 88: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 89 and 90: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 91 and 92: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 93 and 94: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 95 and 96: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 97 and 98: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 99 and 100: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 101 and 102: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 103 and 104: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 105 and 106: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 107 and 108: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 109 and 110: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 111 and 112: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 113 and 114: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 115 and 116: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 117 and 118: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 119 and 120: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 121 and 122: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 123: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 127 and 128: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 129 and 130: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 131 and 132: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 133 and 134: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 135 and 136: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 137 and 138: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 139 and 140: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 141 and 142: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 143 and 144: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 145 and 146: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 147 and 148: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 149 and 150: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 151 and 152: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 153 and 154: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 155 and 156: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 157 and 158: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 159 and 160: detailed regulation, should there b
- Page 161 and 162: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 163 and 164: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 165 and 166: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 167 and 168: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 169 and 170: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 171 and 172: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
- Page 173 and 174: Nuclear Decommissioning: Management
Nuclear Decommissioning: Management of Costs and Risks<br />
____________________________________________________________________________________________<br />
4.8.1. Workforce aspects in <strong>the</strong> decommissioning projects<br />
In respect <strong>to</strong> workforce issues, <strong>the</strong> best practice is <strong>to</strong>:<br />
Work as much as possible with own experienced persons that have insider knowledge on <strong>the</strong><br />
facility and its operating his<strong>to</strong>ry;<br />
Overcome inner barriers and manage changes in <strong>the</strong> perspective of those;<br />
Increase and train knowledge and skills of those <strong>to</strong>wards decommissioning.<br />
Bulgaria<br />
Bulgaria chose a different way <strong>to</strong> restructure <strong>the</strong> workforce needed for decommissioning. After<br />
transferring <strong>the</strong> ownership of Unit 1 and 2 in 2008 <strong>to</strong> <strong>the</strong> organisation DP RAO (see chapter 4.4.1) <strong>the</strong><br />
respective unit in this organisation was set up. The staff at that time was very small and did not<br />
include workforce personnel.<br />
Only after <strong>the</strong> Kozloduy Units 1 and 2 received <strong>the</strong> license as installations for <strong>the</strong> management of<br />
radioactive wastes in 2010, around 100 'specialists', former employees of <strong>the</strong> NPP, were also<br />
transferred <strong>to</strong> DP RAO (DP RAO 2013). According <strong>to</strong> different insiders, at that time most of <strong>the</strong><br />
employees did not see this as an attractive future opportunity and DP RAO not as an attractive<br />
employer so that <strong>the</strong> risk of losing knowledge and experience was very high.<br />
Only after <strong>the</strong> transfer of Units 3 and 4 followed in 2012 <strong>the</strong> situation improved. In ANNEX 3 <strong>the</strong> more<br />
technical aspects are described (in answering <strong>to</strong> <strong>the</strong> aspects 'acceptance of <strong>the</strong> new targets, job<br />
satisfaction, self-complacency, expert excellence' in question), so that <strong>the</strong> respective aspects cannot be<br />
evaluated.<br />
The named training courses in ANNEX 3 show that it has been recognized what re-qualification<br />
means and how valuable improved skills and knowledge is.<br />
Lithuania<br />
The minutes of <strong>the</strong> meeting (as documented in ANNEX 4) report about a very long period that it <strong>to</strong>ok<br />
<strong>to</strong> overcome previous structures, <strong>to</strong> adapt <strong>to</strong> <strong>the</strong> new tasks and <strong>to</strong> see decommissioning as a new<br />
challenge. This process is described as 'still ongoing', but majorly settled. In <strong>the</strong> meantime new<br />
personnel, that is not familiar with <strong>the</strong> operating habits, is employed and contributes <strong>to</strong> progress in<br />
this field.<br />
About 5 000 employees were employed during operation (ANNEX 4), while 2 053 employees worked<br />
at INPP on 2 January 2013 (INPP 2013b). Most of <strong>to</strong>day's employees stem from <strong>the</strong> operational phase.<br />
Remarkably are <strong>the</strong> efforts <strong>to</strong> adapt a set of safety culture indica<strong>to</strong>rs, which were already developed<br />
and implemented in <strong>the</strong> operational phase, <strong>to</strong> <strong>the</strong> specific needs and conditions in <strong>the</strong><br />
decommissioning phase.<br />
123