Construction Schedule Delay Risk Assessment by Using Combined AHP-RII Methodology for International NPP Project

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

In this study, Nuclear Power Plant (NPP) construction schedule delay risk assessment methodology is developed and the construction delay risk is assessed for turnkey international NPP projects.
Three levels of delay factors were selected through literature review and discussions with nuclear industry experts. A questionnaire survey was conducted on the basis of an analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and Relative Importance Index (RII) methods and the schedule delay risk is assessed qualitatively and quantitatively by severity and frequency of occurrence of delay factors. This study assigns four main delay factors to the first level: main contractor, utility, regulatory authority, and financial and country factor. The second and the third levels are designed with 12 sub-factors and 32 sub-sub-factors, respectively.
This study finds the top five most important sub-sub-factors, which are as follows: policy changes, political instability and public intervention; uncompromising regulatory criteria and licensing documents conflicting with existing regulations; robust design document review procedures; redesign due to errors in design and design changes; and worldwide shortage of qualified and experienced nuclear specific equipment manufacturers.
The proposed combined AHP-RII methodology is capable of assessing delay risk effectively and efficiently. Decision makers can apply risk informed decision making to avoid unexpected construction delays of NPPs

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 E. Forman, "Theory and methodology aggregating individual judgments and priorities with the analytic hierarchy process" 108 : 165-169, 1998

2 I.N. Kessides, "The future of the nuclear industry reconsidered: risks, uncertainties, and continued promise" 48 : 185-208, 2012

3 A. Grubler, "The costs of the French nuclear scale-up: a case of negative learning by doing" 38 : 5174-5188, 2010

4 R.J. Chapman, "The controlling influences on effective risk identification and assessment for construction design management" 19 : 147-160, 2001

5 T.L. Saaty, "The Analytic Hierarchy Process- Panning, Priority Setting, Resource Allocation" McGraw-Hill 1980

6 B. Srdjevic, "Synthesis of individual best local priority vectors in AHP-group decision making" 13 : 2045-2056, 2013

7 Y.N. Alsuwehri, "Supplier Evaluation and Selection by Using The Analytic Hierarchy Process Approach, Engineering Management Field Project" University of Kansas 2011

8 K.L. Ravisankar, "Study on the quantification of delay factors in construction industry" 4 : 105-113, 2014

9 B.W. Boehm, "Software risk management: principles and practices" 8 : 32-41, 1991

10 S. Aminbakhsh, "Safety risk assessment using analytic hierarchy process (AHP) during planning and budgeting of construction projects" 46 : 99-105, 2013

11 A. Reza, "Risk assessment model selection in construction industry" 38 : 9105-9111, 2011

12 "Risk Management e Vocabulary"

13 M. Cooper, "Public Risk, Private Profit Ratepayer Cost, Utility Imprudence Advanced Cost Recovery for Reactor Construction Creates Another Nuclear Fiasco, Not a Renaissance" Institute for Energy and the Environment 2013

14 M.A. Mustafa, "Project risk assessment using the analytic hierarchy process" 38 : 46-52, 1991

15 D.F. Cooper, "Project Risk Management Guidelines: Managing Risk in Large Projects and Complex Procurements" John Wiley & Sons Ltd 2005

16 International Atomic Energy Agency, "Project Management in Nuclear Power Plant Construction: Guidelines and Experience" 2012

17 V.T. Luua, "Ogunlanad, Quantifying schedule risk in construction projects using Bayesian belief networks" 27 : 39-50, 2009

18 A. Adamantiades, "Nuclear power for sustainable development: current status and future prospects" 37 : 5149-5166, 2009

19 S.W. Kidd, "Nuclear Power e Economics and public acceptance" 1 : 277-281, 2013

20 International Atomic Energy Agency, "Managing the First Nuclear Power Plant Project" 2007

21 P. Elkington, "Managing project risks: a case study from the utilities sector" 20 : 49-57, 2002

22 R. Mehdizadeh, "Dynamic and Multi-perspective Risk Management of Construction Projects Using Tailor-made Risk Breakdown Structures" Universite de Bordeux 2012

23 Long Le-Hoai, "Delay and Cost Overruns in Vietnam Large Construction Projects: A Comparison with Other Selected Countries" 대한토목학회 12 (12): 367-377, 2008

24 T.L. Saaty, "Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process" 1 : 83-98, 2008

25 G. Harris, "Cost estimates for nuclear power in the UK" 62 : 431-442, 2013

26 Y. Olawale, "Cost and time control of construction projects: Inhibiting factors and mitigating measures in practice" 28 : 509-526, 2005

27 J.M.L. Moreira, "Construction time of PWRs" 55 : 531-542, 2013

28 C. Ramanathan, "Construction delays causing risks on time and cost- a critical review" 12 : 37-57, 2012

29 KPMG International, "Construction Risk in New Nuclear Power Projects e Eyes Wide Open"

30 S. Vyas, "Causes of delay in project construction in developing countries" 4 : 24-29, 2013

31 S.A. Assaf, "Causes of delay in large construction projects" 24 : 349-357, 2006

32 M. Sambasivan, "Causes and effects of delays in Malaysian construction industry" 25 : 517-526, 2007

33 Project Business research group Aalto University Finland, "Case Olkiluoto 3 Nuclear Power Plant Project in Finland" 2010

34 S.C. Ward, "Assessing and managing important Risks" 17 : 331-336, 1999

35 M.M. Marzouk, "Analyzing delay causes in Egyptian construction projects" 5 : 49-55, 2014

36 I. Ruuska, "A new governance approach for multi-firm projects: lessons from Olkiluoto 3 and Flamanville 3 nuclear power plant projects" 29 : 647-660, 2011

37 Project Management Institute, "A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide)"