Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Decommissioning”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2020

Developing Decommissioning Cost Estimating Relationships and the Decommissioning Estimate Analysis Library Estimating System - 20423

DOE-EM's Consolidated Business Center (EM-CBC) Office of Cost Estimating has developed a system of Decommissioning Cost Estimating Relationships (CERs) and Models to improve the reliability and efficiency of its estimates. The development builds on the multi-year process of collecting and organizing historical cost data from DOEEMs decommissioning projects and estimate model development to support project and program-level decommissioning estimates. The latest work has extended these models down to project scope element and component building area levels, allowing the actual costs of work for these estimate components to be assembled into estimates that reflect specific projects. The CERs have been incorporated into two estimator-friendly products - as cost libraries in the MII estimating program and as an MS Excel-based model, and are available for DOE federal staff use. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Decommissioning of the V1 Nuclear Power Plant Jaslovske Bohunice - 20270

The paper focuses on introducing the approach and method applied for decommissioning of the V1 nuclear power plant (further the 'V1 NPP') located in Jaslovske Bohunice in the Slovak Republic, to the conference participants. The Paper outlines activities and steps necessary to comply with the requirements contained in the decision of the Slovak government from 1999 regarding the early shutdown of the V1 NPP. The company responsible for the V1 NPP decommissioning is Jadrova a vyradovacia spolocnost, a.s., (further JAVYS) with the State as a sole shareholder. On the basis of the V1 NPP Decommissioning Conceptual Plan, out of four assessed options, JAVYS selected the immediate decommissioning option (the 'IDO') for the V1 NPP. On the basis of multi-criteria analysis, the IDO specified the approach of immediate and continuous dismantling of equipment followed by demolition of buildings and preparation of the site for its further potential use. The IDO also included the summary of technical, environmental, legislative information as well as the determination of assumed costs for decommissioning of the V1 NPP. Prior to commencement of the V1 NPP decommissioning, within the process of termination of operation, activities connected with de-fuelling, monitoring, processing of historical waste and, not to forget, the process of obtaining the license for the V1 NPP decommissioning were executed. JAVYS decided to divide the decommissioning process into two stages. In 2011, JAVYS obtained a license for the first stage of the V1 NPP decommissioning. Within this stage, dismantling of inactive equipment, demolitions of inactive buildings, monitoring of systems and preparatory works for the upcoming stage of decommissioning were implemented. In 2015, in line with the license for the 2. stage of the V1 NPP decommissioning, the activities of decontamination and dismantling of contaminated and active equipment as well as demolitions of remaining buildings began. In this stage radioactive waste (RAW) produced during the decommissioning is to be processed. After decontamination, the material fulfilling the free release criteria is to be released into the environment, the site is to be cleared from the scope of the Atomic Act and released from the surveillance of the national regulators. Future application of certain methods and techniques for decontamination and dismantling in similar environments might bring an added value to the operators. Paper includes a description of best practices for Nuclear Power Plant VVER type reactors decommissioning. Schedule comparison is given to show how the critical path of certain projects is being managed. Application of the International Standard for Decommissioning Costing (ISDC) methodology provides a uniform method which enables comparison of cost estimates to other nuclear facilities under decommissioning. The cost estimate for the V1 NPP decommissioning has been continuously updated based on more advanced and detailed information on the decommissioning activities and projects. Monitoring of progress of the V1 NPP decommissioning is performed via four key-performance indicators. The Earned Value Management (EVM) methodology is used for evaluating time and cost aspect of decommissioning activities while waste conditioning index is calculated by comparing the actually produced waste to planned values of waste for a respective monitored period. Radiological safety index is assessed by comparison of the personnel records on the individual yearly doses received by each respective employee to the boundary value. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Feedback from International Decommissioning Planning Projects - 20269

Decommissioning of Nuclear Power Plants is an increasing reality in many countries with nuclear power. Already many years before final shutdown, planning of the decommissioning work is usually started in order to understand for example the costs, waste volume capacity and licensing work needed. In many countries it is required to have a final decommissioning plan before any decommissioning work is allowed to start. Westinghouse has been involved in international decommissioning planning for more than 30 years, where the first 20 years was mostly funding and preliminary plans due to that decommissioning was many years away. However, as many more plants are now moving into decommissioning, the focus has shifted to final decommissioning plans with budgets instead of funding plans, strategic decisions instead of choices, waste volume specifications instead of estimates and a defined approach instead of what ifs. Westinghouse has developed a methodology based on the planning and execution of many decommissioning projects in Europe, America and Asia. That international experience and understanding helps the customers to adopt a systematic planning process where strategy development is done with the end state in mind, where the goals are clearly outlined and the starting point described. The process and steps to reach the desired end state need to be clearly defined and all options/alternatives evaluated from a cost/benefit point of view. This is followed by a thorough and quantitative risk analysis in order to give solid recommendations and credible conclusions. One important feedback has been that real decommissioning experience from reference projects is invaluable for an efficient and timely progress in order not to spend unnecessary time and effort on understanding the barriers and links between different activities in decommissioning. Skilled project managers or engineers can drive the project forward, but without decommissioning experience previously gained, valuable lessons learned are not used and the same mistakes can be made again. Many utilities have invested in knowledge transfer from other decommissioning projects through site visits, exchange programs and supplier meetings, which is a valuable asset and way of implementing lessons learned from performed decommissioning projects into the planning process. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2021

Business Models for Coal Plant Decommissioning

Aging coal-fired power plants are retiring across the United States. Researchers at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory studied coal-fired power plant decommissioning business models to support program development for the Department of Energy’s Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy (EERE) to engage with communities affected by power plant retirement processes. Evaluating and reducing the impact on coal-dependent communities from phasing out coal production is a crucial piece of nationwide economic development and community-directed engagement in the clean energy future. This report describes the steps in the typical coal-fired power plant decommissioning process, including analysis of the following key factors: Drivers including policy and regulations, competition with other fuels, and corporate responsibility goals; Types of coal plant decommissioning including plant retirement without full decommissioning, repurposing with fuel switch, redeveloping to utilize existing transmission, and decommissioning and repurposing with other commercial activities; and, Costs of coal plant decommissioning, including variations across regulated and deregulated markets and the funding resources to support decommissioning activities. The details described in this report relied heavily on the availability of local news reports and communications regarding plant retirements, as the researchers identified a lack of formal literature surrounding business models for coal plant decommissioning and a need for a more robust source material collection. In addition, a lack of oversight entities responsible for decommissioning processes may have led to this shortfall of information. Future research regarding coal plant decommissioning can include quantitative studies on power plant retirement drivers, procedures, and costs, qualitative assessments on affects decommissioning has on surrounding communities, investors, and other stakeholders, and identifying best practices to engage community stakeholders in the decommissioning process.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗
DOE OSTI2026

Out With the Old: Empirical Trends in U.S. Land‐Based Wind Turbine Decommissioning and Repowering

A growing number of wind turbines (WTs) across the globe are now reaching or exceeding their expected service lifetime; WT decommissioning is on the rise. Accordingly, questions pertaining to WT end-of-life have risen in importance in policy and practice. Yet, research on the various factors relating to WT decommissioning is relatively sparse. Moreover, the key assumptions underpinning that prior research (e.g., the lifespan of WTs, characteristics of WTs being decommissioned, and whether the site is repowered with new WTs) have never been empirically tested across a large set of decommissioned WTs. Leveraging a uniquely comprehensive and spatially explicit dataset of decommissioned WTs in the United States, this research analyzes spatial, technological, and temporal trends in WT decommissioning and develops a novel predictive model for WT decommissioning. Our analysis pinpoints more than 12,400 WTs that have been fully decommissioned in the United States., the majority of which have been relatively old (> 30 years) and small (< 200 kW). While a WT's age alone is a good predictor of the likelihood of decommissioning, other factors such as the size of the WT and recent performance are also important and significant predictors. Most sites where decommissioning has occurred have seen subsequent repowering, with repowered plants featuring substantially fewer WTs (−86 on average) and higher rated plant capacity (+62 MW on average). Many existing WTs in the U.S. are approaching the end of their expected life with roughly 7500 being 20 or more years old. Findings can help policymakers and stakeholders begin preparing for this potential wave of future decommissioning and repowering.

Decommissioning / End-of-life↗
DOE OSTI2020

Systematic Analysis of Drivers and Barriers of Cross-Sectorial Learning Between Nuclear and Oil and Gas Decommissioning Projects - 20139

Project and megaproject management in the energy sector have historically focused on the planning and delivery of the construction of infrastructure. Therefore, policies are predominantly oriented to support the construction of infrastructure rather than its decommissioning. However, globally, several facilities have reached (or will soon reach) their end-of-life and need to be decommissioned. These facilities span across the energy sector, including nuclear power plants and oil and gas rigs, whose decommissioning present unprecedented techno-socio-economic challenges. Moreover, globally, their decommissioning cost is estimated to reach hundreds of billions of US dollars and this budget keeps increasing, with limited knowledge-transfer across industries to mitigate the spiraling increase of this figure. Cross-sectorial knowledge-transfer is a way to tackle this matter and improve the planning and delivery of decommissioning and waste management projects. The aim of this research is to build a road-map based on cross-sectorial industrial experience, designed to promote the sharing of good practices between projects both within and across industries dealing with major decommissioning and waste management challenges. To reach this aim, the tacit knowledge of senior practitioners on several large scale nuclear and oil and gas decommissioning projects is made explicit by the means of semi-structured interviews, systematically analyzed through directed content analysis. The results of this analysis include a list of good practices that could and should be transferred to nuclear decommissioning projects, including the need to promote the adoption of incentives explicitly linked to the project deliverables, and to develop long-term plans to support smooth transition from operations to decommissioning. Suggestions about how the knowledge-transfer can be promoted within and across organizations are also discussed. In this way, this research provides practical guidance for project managers and policymakers on how to support the planning and delivery of projects with improved performance. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Innovative Approaches to the Decommissioning of a Redundant Plutonium Processing Facility - 20147

At Sellafield, in the North West of the United Kingdom (UK), there are a number of redundant plutonium processing facilities. Over the past three decades several decommissioning strategies have been deployed to clean up these redundant facilities. Whilst there have been many successes previously reported, there remain many challenges. As previously presented at WM2017 (Paper Ref 17081) some of these challenges have recently been addressed through a new approach which introduced a number of innovations. The purpose of these innovations is to seek ways to significantly reduce risks to both decommissioning personnel and the environment by minimising the extent of physical 'hands on' decommissioning activities and by simplifying the waste production process. This paper provides an update on the progress of these innovations since 2017. Additionally, the paper also provides details of the new decommissioning technologies which have been introduced over the past 2 years to enable the most challenging aspects of the redundant plutonium processing facility to be decommissioned. These new decommissioning technologies address challenges associated with the preparation of process vessels and pipework to enable their safe in-situ size reduction by remote means: - New decommissioning techniques have been introduced to allow penetrations to be remotely cut into process vessels and pipework to provide a means of accessing and controlling the venting of any potential hydrogen gas present. - Additionally, a new large scale bespoke remote diamond wire cutting machine has been designed and manufactured to enable the process vessels to be size reduced in situ. Both of these new cutting technologies have involved collaborative working with specialist equipment suppliers including extensive development, trialling demonstration and commissioning prior to bringing the equipment into operational service. Several years of work have now culminated in reaching the final stages of decommissioning of the redundant plutonium processing facility with decommissioning of the final process vessels now underway and completion expected by the end of 2019. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

MH-1A Sturgis Decommissioning and Dismantlement - 20281

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) with its prime contractor, Aptim Federal Services, LLC (APTIM), recycled 5,260 metric tons (11.6 million pounds) of material from Sturgis Barge (Sturgis) during the Decommissioning and Dismantlement of the MH-1A nuclear power reactor. The overall objective of the project was to reduce residual radioactivity associated with MH-1A to levels that permitted release of Sturgis for dismantlement and termination of the Army Reactor Office permit. By effectively applying waste hierarchy's three Rs - reduce, reuse and recycle - the Sturgis project not only minimized the amount of waste that required disposal at landfills, but also reduced the potential for long-term environmental liability emanating from these landfills. The project team completed the physical decommissioning efforts in June 2018 in Galveston, TX. In September 2018, radiological surveys were completed to demonstrate the vessel could be released for shipbreaking. Sturgis was towed from Galveston, TX to Brownsville, TX in late September 2018. Shipbreaking, dismantlement and recycling efforts began in early October 2018 and were completed on 15 March 2019. As part of the decommissioning effort in Galveston, the team shipped 69 shipments (860 metric tons) of low-level radioactive waste and radioactive components to the Waste Control Specialist (WCS) facility in Andrews TX for disposal. Certain radioactive components had to be transferred to the Department of Energy prior to placing the materials into the Federal Waste Facility located within WCS. However, most of the radioactive waste was characterized, profiled, approved and managed under the WCS permitted radioactive waste exemption process authorized and implemented by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) and the Radioactive Materials Division. This allows LLRW and LLMW to be shipped as regulated waste and then upon receipt at WCS through satisfying the relevant waste acceptance criteria the waste is exempted and placed into the WCS RCRA permitted cell. An additional 35 shipments (544 metric ton) of contaminated hazardous waste water were transported to U.S. Ecology in Robstown, TX for treatment/disposal. An additional 36 shipments (500 metric tons) of non-hazardous wastewater was sent to Republic Waste Services' facility in Fresno, TX. The disposal of these materials required close coordination with State of Texas regulators. During decommissioning, the project team recycled approximately 270 metric tons (600,000 pounds) of lead and steel. As part of the dismantlement in Brownsville, TX the team recycled approximately 5,000 metric tons (11 million pounds) of ferrous and non-ferrous material, limiting our disposal requirements to about 180 metric tons (400,000 pounds) of material (<4% from entire shipbreaking activity). Although the primary hazard being mitigated by this project was radiological, recycling was always a priority for the project. The team strived to achieve sustainability goals as we implemented this one of a kind project. Scrap metal recycling has a large positive impact on the environment and can also favorably impact project disposal costs. Steel is among the most recycled material in the world. Nearly 40% of the world's steel production is made from scrap. Recycling steel also requires 75% less energy than producing it from raw materials. By using recycled steel rather than virgin materials, 2.33 kg of carbon emissions are eliminated per kg of steel [1]. The project recycled more than 4,500 metric tons (10 million pounds) of steel, which eliminated about 10,400 metric tons (23 million pounds) of CO{sub 2}. By implementing a recycling initiative for the Sturgis project, the team was able to realize cost avoidance for disposal of scrap, cost savings from the metals recycled, plus the project provided benefits to the environment through our recycling efforts. Once the dismantlement was complete, the team prepared a detailed decommissioning closure report, which allowed for the termination of the Army Reactor Decommissioning Permit. While it not only reduced any potential long-term environmental liability, this project to decommission and dismantle a floating nuclear power plant is truly unprecedented - it is a prime example of the USACE mission which is: 'Engineering solutions for the Nation's toughest challenges'. This unique, one of a kind, historical power plant was never designed to be taken apart, and the available information about its construction was lacking in many details. The hazards that required mitigation dictated a painstaking and deliberate process in order to avoid any release to the environment and the community, and to protect the health and safety of the workers involved while keeping the waste hierarchy's three R's - reduce, reuse and recycle at the forefront. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2024

Developing expert scientific consensus on the environmental and societal effects of marine artificial structures prior to decommissioning

Thousands of artificial (‘human-made’) structures are present in the marine environment, many at or approaching end-of-life and requiring urgent decisions regarding their decommissioning. No consensus has been reached on which decommissioning option(s) result in optimal environmental and societal outcomes, in part, owing to a paucity of evidence from real-world decommissioning case studies. To address this significant challenge, we asked a worldwide panel of scientists to provide their expert opinion. They were asked to identify and characterise the ecosystem effects of artificial structures in the sea, their causes and consequences, and to identify which, if any, should be retained following decommissioning. Experts considered that most of the pressures driving ecological and societal effects from marine artificial structures (MAS) were of medium severity, occur frequently, and are dependent on spatial scale with local-scale effects of greater magnitude than regional effects. The duration of many effects following decommissioning were considered to be relatively short, in the order of days. Overall, environmental effects of structures were considered marginally undesirable, while societal effects marginally desirable. Experts therefore indicated that any decision to leave MAS in place at end-of-life to be more beneficial to society than the natural environment. However, some individual environmental effects were considered desirable and worthy of retention, especially in certain geographic locations, where structures can support improved trophic linkages, increases in tourism, habitat provision, and population size, and provide stability in population dynamics. The expert analysis consensus that the effects of MAS are both negative and positive for the environment and society, gives no strong support for policy change whether removal or retention is favoured until further empirical evidence is available to justify change to the status quo. The combination of desirable and undesirable effects associated with MAS present a significant challenge for policy- and decision-makers in their justification to implement decommissioning options. Decisions may need to be decided on a case-by-case basis accounting for the trade-off in costs and benefits at a local level.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

GPS-Based Gamma Survey for Characterizing and Decommissioning NORM Sites - 20389

Gamma survey techniques are an especially powerful decommissioning tool at naturally occurring radioactive material (NORM) sites due to both the low cost to obtain data over a large spatial scale and the abundance of gamma emitters in the uranium and thorium decay series. Gamma surveys are executed by coupling a detector - most often a sodium iodide crystal - to a global positioning system (GPS), then reporting a location and gross gamma reading coincidentally to a data logger. Systems may be carried by workers or mounted to a car, all-terrain vehicle, or unmanned aerial system (UAS). The resulting data set provides a high-resolution but low precision map of the gamma radiation field over the area surveyed. Frequently this map is also correlated to soil concentrations of NORM radionuclides (most often, Ra-226) and/or exposure rate. Gamma survey parameters such as movement speed, transect spacing, and data logging frequency define the spatial resolution of the resulting surface, and can be optimized depending on the desired survey sensitivity. This paper examines gamma survey as a tool for decommissioning NORM sites and provides an overview of current gamma survey technology designed to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the decommissioning process. Topics to be discussed in the paper include: - An overview of gamma survey systems, and the utility of different delivery vehicles depending on desired cost, desired spatial resolution, and site topography. - The influence of physical detector characteristics on detection sensitivity and survey planning. - The tradeoff between high-resolution and large spatial extent, but inherently uncertain data, and low-resolution, low spatial extent, but highly certain data, as well as the specific utility of each of these types of data during NORM facility decommissioning. - Confounding variables that may limit the utility of gamma survey at some sites (e.g., radon gas and spatial heterogeneity / hot spots), and methods to plan for and control these conditions. Results show that the confounding variables, such as radon and data output can greatly influence the overall data quality associated with the decommissioning process. In addition, the use of real-time and aerial survey platforms provides a method for ensuring proper spatial extent of the data. When applied thoughtfully, gamma survey is a powerful tool for detecting NORM radionuclides in the environment and a cost-effective technique for identifying areas requiring remediation. However, entities performing or using gamma survey as a decommissioning tool must be aware of both its advantages and its limitations before basing remediation or regulatory action on gamma survey results. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2022

Knowledge Transfer and Training in Safeguards for Decommissioned Nuclear Facilities (Project Final Report for FY2022)

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) applies safeguards to nuclear facilities that are not operating, including those undergoing decommissioning, and the IAEA’s effort in this area is both considerable and increasing. Specifically, the IAEA Department of Safeguards’ Division of Concepts and Planning (SGCP-003: Safeguards Approaches) identified an R&D need to “Develop safeguards implementation guidelines for facilities under decommissioning and safeguards concepts for post-accident facilities under decommissioning”. Nuclear facilities undergoing decommissioning are not exempt from safeguards agreements between the IAEA and Host State, and, accordingly, the requirement for verification of no diversion of nuclear material and detection of undeclared activities at decommissioned facilities remain even after facility shutdown. However, the effort required to meet safeguards objectives diminishes as nuclear material and essential equipment are removed during the decommissioning process which shifts the emphasis from verification of ever-diminishing fissile or source material inventories to verification of changes in facility design and equipment operability.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗
DOE OSTI2022

Drones for Decommissioning

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has responsibility for regulating the safe decommissioning of facilities and sites to meet the License Termination Rule in 10 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 20, Standards for Protection Against Radiation, Subpart E “Radiological Criteria for License Termination.” Decommissioning is performed in accordance with 10 CFR Part 50, Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities, as part of license termination (§50.82) and release of the facility or site for unrestricted use (§50.83). The guidance currently demonstrates the minimum requirements and necessary conditions for conducting radiological surveys by a person carrying a radiation detector(s). The Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) evaluated the use of an unoccupied aerial vehicle (UAV) to conduct radiological surveys that could be used in decommissioning to potentially reduce time, cost, and worker safety compared to current survey methods. The objective of this project was to evaluate the performance and limitations of a UAV to support a decommissioning radiological survey and compare it to a radiological survey conducted by a human. The primary research questions of interest evaluated were: 1. Did observed UAV paths differ from human paths and, if so, how much? 2. Did survey path deviation affect survey results and, if so, how? 3. Were radiological measurements from human and UAV surveys significantly different? To answer these research questions, an experimental field was set up at PNNL’s 3440 test track, and it included radiological sources commonly surveyed during decommissioning: cobalt-60 (Co-60), cesium-137 (Cs-137), and americium-241 (Am-241). Nine check sources (three each of Am-241, Cs-137, and Co-60) with activities ranging from 3.54 µCi to 39.34 µCi were set over a path that also included an area for measuring background radiation. An Aurelia X6 UAV coupled with a GPS and lidar unit was used to conduct the radiological surveys. UAV and human surveys were conducted using two different NaI(Tl) scintillation radiation detectors (2 in. × 2 in. Ludlum, Inc. and 2 in. × 0.04 in. Alpha Spectra, Inc.) at a travel velocity of approximately 0.2 m/s at a low (15–40 cm median altitude) or high (87–105 cm median altitude) survey altitude. Since the survey velocity and altitude parameters were atypical for normal UAV operations, testing was done prior to conducting the radiological surveys to establish airworthiness, evaluate the navigation system, and establish flight control. Human and UAV surveys were paired according to the detector type and altitude regime to compare the survey data. The results of this proof-of-concept research determined that the UAV and human surveys followed similar survey paths and detected the radiological sources with no significant statistical difference (in 33 out of 36 surveys). However, further research is needed prior to deploying UAVs for decommissioning surveys.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗
DOE OSTI2021

A Survey of Federal and State-Level Solar System Decommissioning Policies in the United States

In the United States, cumulative installed utility-scale solar photovoltaic (PV) capacity reached more than 60 gigawatts (GW)dc at the end of 2020 (Davis et al. 2021b). Federal and state renewable energy and net-zero emissions policies will continue to drive solar development in the United States with installed utility-scale PV projected to quadruple (240 GWdc) by 2030 (Davis et al. 2021a; Heeter 2014). Although more than 75% of all U.S. installed utility-scale PV came online in the last 5 years, federal, state, and local governments are planning for system decommissioning (Davis et al. 2021b). Our research found that as of April 2021, one federal agency, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and 15 U.S. states have solar decommissioning policies in place. North Carolina is also in the process of drafting solar decommissioning regulations, and at least 4 states (Maine, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Texas) proposed solar decommissioning bills in the 2021 legislative session. This report provides a survey and brief overview of both federal and U.S. statewide solar decommissioning policies, and a discussion of some of the potential impacts different policy designs may have on utility-scale solar development, including impacts that might influence construction timelines and over project costs.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

U.S. Solar System Decommissioning Policies

In the United States, cumulative installed utility-scale solar photovoltaic (PV) capacity reached more than 60 gigawatts (GW)dc at the end of 2020. Federal and state renewable energy and net-zero emissions policies will continue to drive solar development in the United States with installed utility-scale PV projected to quadruple (240 GWdc) by 2030. Although more than 75% of all U.S. installed utility-scale PV came online in the last 5 years, federal, state, and local governments are planning for system decommissioning. Our research found that as of April 2021, one federal agency, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and 15 U.S. states have solar decommissioning policies in place. North Carolina is also in the process of drafting solar decommissioning regulations, and at least 4 states (Maine, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Texas) proposed solar decommissioning bills in the 2021 legislative session. This presentation looks at U.S. federal and state solar decommissioning policies who they apply to, when they apply, the requirements/responsibilities, and what the impacts are.

circular economy↗
DOE OSTI2023

To what extent can decommissioning options for marine artificial structures move us toward environmental targets?

Switching from fossil fuels to renewable energy is key to international energy transition efforts and the move toward net zero. For many nations, this requires decommissioning of hundreds of oil and gas infrastructure in the marine environment. Current international, regional and national legislation largely dictates that structures must be completely removed at end-of-life although, increasingly, alternative decommissioning options are being promoted and implemented. Yet, a paucity of real-world case studies describing the impacts of decommissioning on the environment make decision-making with respect to which option(s) might be optimal for meeting international and regional strategic environmental targets challenging. To address this gap, we draw together international expertise and judgment from marine environmental scientists on marine artificial structures as an alternative source of evidence that explores how different decommissioning options might ameliorate pressures that drive environmental status toward (or away) from environmental objectives. Synthesis reveals that for 37 United Nations and Oslo-Paris Commissions (OSPAR) global and regional environmental targets, experts consider repurposing or abandoning individual structures, or abandoning multiple structures across a region, as the options that would most strongly contribute toward targets. This collective view suggests complete removal may not be best for the environment or society. However, different decommissioning options act in different ways and make variable contributions toward environmental targets, such that policy makers and managers would likely need to prioritise some targets over others considering political, social, economic, and ecological contexts. Current policy may not result in optimal outcomes for the environment or society.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

Lessons Learned from More than Three Decades of Decommissioning and RAW Management in Slovakia - 20074

The purpose of this paper is to describe utilization of experience of JAVYS Company acquired while acting as the Slovak national decommissioning and radioactive waste management entity. JAVYS manages both the decommissioning of A1 NPP (shut down after series of accidents) and V1 NPP (shut down after standard operation) and related radioactive waste management. Besides JAVYS is responsible for management of institutional radioactive waste in Slovakia. The paper is focusing on selected successfully completed projects and related lessons learned from development of special procedures and implementation of activities within decommissioning and management of generated waste streams from cradle to grave. Recently, experience and lessons learned from all aforementioned activities are used internationally to provide assistance to other countries in order to overcome difficulties and to successfully implement various projects dealing with decommissioning and radioactive waste management. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2026

Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) End-of-Performance and Decommissioning Considerations [Slides]

This presentation provides a comprehensive overview of end-of-performance and decommissioning considerations for large-scale Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESS). It outlines expected system lifespans, midterm assessment needs, and pathways for extending operational life through augmentation or repowering. The presentation details regulatory requirements that govern decommissioning plans, cost estimates, financial assurance mechanisms, and performance obligations across multiple jurisdictions. It further examines end-of-life equipment management, including recycling, waste handling, transportation, and environmental compliance. Designed to support Malawi's electricity-sector institutions, the presentation highlights how planning for decommissioning and environmental stewardship can be integrated early in project development to ensure safe, financially accountable, and environmentally responsible BESS system retirement.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2020

The TRANSCEND University Consortium: Theme 2 - Site Decommissioning, Deconstruction and Remediation - 20329

This paper will discuss the aims, objectives and progress to-date under Theme 2 of the TRANSCEND consortium project: Site decommissioning, deconstruction and remediation. Decommissioning nuclear sites involves waste retrieval, decontamination, deconstruction and, where necessary, containment and/or remediation of the remaining structure and surrounding land. Critical to management of these processes is limiting radiation exposure for the workforce, restricting the spread of radionuclides in groundwater, surface water and airborne particulates, and minimising the volume of contaminated waste for disposal. The aim of Theme 2 research is to develop new technologies for monitoring, remediation and containment that serve to minimise the volume of radioactively contaminated waste for disposal, for application prior to, during and after retrieval, deconstruction and decontamination operations. Prior research, conducted under the previous DISTINCTIVE project, demonstrated that colloidal silica grout can penetrate low permeability materials (including cement) for hydraulic barrier formation, and improved sorption capacity. The silica grout can be injected at surface using extremely small (potentially gravity-driven) fluid pressures, without the need for borehole drilling. Current work is investigating the erodibility of silica-grouted soils for inhibition of airborne and water-borne particulates as well as enhancing the grout's sorption capacity by addition of other materials to provide a chemical, as well as hydraulic, barrier to subsurface migration. EK remediation uses low voltage DC current to control migration of contaminants in porous media as well as to remove or degrade them. Researchers in the consortium have already demonstrated that low-energy ex-situ EK techniques can be used to provide remediation and volume minimisation for AWE legacy wastes in the UK. Under the current project researchers are building EK test cells containing simulated site materials at laboratory and intermediate(m)-scales to: remove, focus or degrade contaminants (remediation or waste minimisation); and direct subsurface water, chemical and colloid flow (fencing/containment or forced migration). This lab-based research is being informed by numerical models of EK processes that can subsequently be used to design full-scale on-site applications by nuclear site holders. Research under theme 2 of TRANSCEND will ultimately combine novel non-invasive detection technologies with EK techniques and colloidal silica grout barriers, to optimise the containment of radionuclide contamination in soils. Thus, allowing us to detect in-situ contamination, mobilise it to a selected location and grout it in-situ, prior to the initiation of decommissioning and deconstruction operations. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗