Peculiarities of Transition from Operation to Decommissioning for the Chernobyl NPP - 18486

Usually the transition period is supposed to last around 5 years and to cover the eventual defueling of the reactor and the reactor cooling pool, completion of the characterization survey and preparation of all necessary documents to start the decommissioning activities in accordance with the decommissioning strategy chosen and the decommissioning plan approved. It was not the case for the Chernobyl NPP due to a number of reasons and obstacles, including delayed defueling due to unavailability of the storage capacities, lack of preparatory work due to prescheduled decommissioning, luck of experience of RBMK-type reactors decommissioning, influence of the destroyed Chernobyl-4 Unit and related works on site. All these factors not only delayed the completion of the characterization survey, but added complications to development of the decommissioning strategy and the decommissioning plan. De facto the issue of end state is still open as the end state for the destroyed Chernobyl-4 as well as the prospects of the exclusion zone transformation need further clarifications and justifications. As a result, the need to reconsider the standard concept of transition period was recognized already by the end of 2000, when Chernobyl-1 and Chernobyl-2 were out of operation for a few years. It was clear that the personnel had generally a bad perception of the prescheduled permanent shutdown decision and a low motivation to change and to learn. The first signs of organizational degradation were visible and the framework of the operational license did not fit well to prevent it. So it was decided to start the legal and organizational transformation into the decommissioning mode without waiting for polishing of the decommissioning strategy and decommissioning plan as in this case both documents seemed to need further adjustments anyway. The transition period (or the termination of operation as it called in the national nuclear safety regulations) was considered as the first phase of decommissioning to be covered by the decommissioning license. The detailed plan of activities for the transition period with proper safety justification documents was the main part of the relevant license application. Human resource management plan and adoption of the management system were important constituents as well. It was also considered reasonable to start some dismantling works already at this phase to avoid further delays and degradation, the works being carefully justified. Eventually such approach added to streamlining the decommissioning process and to avoid further organizational and technical degradation. Flexibility in transition from operation to decommissioning seems necessary in cases of prescheduled or post-accidental decommissioning but may be also beneficial for a scheduled decommissioning case. (authors)