GAO - Shippingport Decommissioning - Lessons Learned?

This GAO Report (B-239632.2 ) dated Sept 4, 1990 was prepared in response by requests from Robert A. Roe Chairman, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology House of Representatives and Robert S. Walker Ranking Minority Member, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology House of Representatives.

In July 1989, they asked for information about the Department of Energy’s (DOE) decommissioning of the Shippingport, Pennsylvania, nuclear power plant. They wanted to know whether DOE had met the goals described at the July 1986 hearings before your Committee. DOE’S goals were to demonstrate that a large nuclear plant can be decommissioned safely and within the costs ($98.3 million) and time frame (April 1990) established, optimize contractor involvement to help transfer information to the private sector, and develop information to assist the nuclear industry with future decommissioning projects. Specifically, they asked us to answer nine questions relating to these goals (app. II provides detailed answers to your questions). We are also providing some perspective on additional information that could assist the commercial nuclear power industry that was not addressed by Shippingport. We previously addressed some of the lessons learned from Shippingport in a June 1990 report to Representative Fazio who was interested in the relationship between Shippingport and the Rancho Seco, California, plant1 This report provides more details about Shippingport’s decommissioning and addresses the usefulness of Shippingport’s decommissioning to such commercial plants as Pathfinder, Peach Bottom, and Fort St. Vrain located in South Dakota, Pennsylvania, and Colorado, respectively.

The GAO found that DOE generally met the goals that it had established for Shippingport. It completed all decommissioning activities in December 1989-4 months ahead of schedule-at a cost of $91.3 million-$7 million under its 1986 estimated cost. According to some utility representatives, the most significant benefit of Shippingport was that DOE demonstrated that technology existed to decommission a plant within the costs and time frame established. In addition, DOE used over eight contractors on the project and produced numerous annual or topical reports that officials believe will be useful to the commercial nuclear industry.