Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2014.12.019

CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE DELAY RISK ASSESSMENT BY USING COMBINED AHP-RII METHODOLOGY FOR AN INTERNATIONAL NPP PROJECT  

HOSSEN, MUHAMMED MUFAZZAL (KEPCO International Nuclear Graduate School (KINGS))
KANG, SUNKOO (KEPCO International Nuclear Graduate School (KINGS))
KIM, JONGHYUN (KEPCO International Nuclear Graduate School (KINGS))
Publication Information
Nuclear Engineering and Technology / v.47, no.3, 2015 , pp. 362-379 More about this Journal
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.
Keywords
Analytic hierarchy process; Frequency of occurrence; Nuclear power plant; Risk; Relative importance index; Severity;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 1  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 A. Reza, K. Azari, N. Mousavi, S.F. Mousavi, S.B. Hosseini, Risk assessment model selection in construction industry, Expert. Syst. Appl. 38 (2011) 9105-9111.   DOI
2 T.L. Saaty, The Analytic Hierarchy Process- Panning, Priority Setting, Resource Allocation, McGraw-Hill, USA, 1980.
3 T.L. Saaty, Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process, Int. J. Services Sci. 1 (2008) 83-98.   DOI
4 M.A. Mustafa, J.F. Al-Bahar, Project risk assessment using the analytic hierarchy process, IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag. 38 (1991) 46-52.   DOI
5 B. Srdjevic, Z. Srdjevic, Synthesis of individual best local priority vectors in AHP-group decision making, Appl. Soft Computing 13 (2013) 2045-2056.   DOI
6 E. Forman, K. Peniwati, Theory and methodology aggregating individual judgments and priorities with the analytic hierarchy process, Eur. J. Operational Res. 108 (1998) 165-169.   DOI
7 Y.N. Alsuwehri, Supplier Evaluation and Selection by Using The Analytic Hierarchy Process Approach, Engineering Management Field Project, Master's of Science, University of Kansas, 2011.
8 C. Ramanathan, S.P. Narayanan, A.B. Idrus, Construction delays causing risks on time and cost- a critical review, Aust. J. Construct. Econ. Build. 12 (2012) 37-57.
9 International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) TECDOC-1555, Managing the First Nuclear Power Plant Project, Vienna, 2007.
10 Project Business research group Aalto University Finland, Case Olkiluoto 3 Nuclear Power Plant Project in Finland, 2010.
11 I.N. Kessides, The future of the nuclear industry reconsidered: risks, uncertainties, and continued promise, Energy Policy 48 (2012) 185-208.   DOI
12 L. Le-Hoai, Y.D. Lee, J.Y. Lee, Delay and cost overruns in Vietnam large construction projects: a comparison with other selected countries", KSCE J. Civ. Eng. 12 (2008) 367-377.   DOI
13 M.M. Marzouk, T.I. El-Rasas, Analyzing delay causes in Egyptian construction projects, J. Adv. Res. 5 (2014) 49-55.   DOI
14 K.L. Ravisankar, S.A. Kumar, V. Krishnamoorthy, Study on the quantification of delay factors in construction industry, Int. J. Emerg. Technol. Adv. Engineering 4 (2014) 105-113.   DOI
15 S.W. Kidd, Nuclear Power - Economics and public acceptance, Energy Strategy Rev. 1 (2013) 277-281.   DOI
16 J.M.L. Moreira, B. Gallinaro, P. Carajilescov, Construction time of PWRs, Energy Policy 55 (2013) 531-542.   DOI
17 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, Vermont Law School, 2013.
18 M. Sambasivan, Y.W. Soon, Causes and effects of delays in Malaysian construction industry, Int. J. Project Manag. 25 (2007) 517-526.   DOI
19 Y. Olawale, M. Sun, Cost and time control of construction projects: Inhibiting factors and mitigating measures in practice, Construct. Manag. Econ. 28 (2005) 509-526.
20 V.T. Luua, S.Y. Kimb, N.V. Tuanc, S.O. Ogunlanad, Quantifying schedule risk in construction projects using Bayesian belief networks, Int. Project Manag. 27 (2009) 39-50.   DOI
21 A. Adamantiades, I. Kessides, Nuclear power for sustainable development: current status and future prospects, Energy Policy 37 (2009) 5149-5166.   DOI
22 G. Harris, P. Heptonstall, R. Gross, D. Handley, Cost estimates for nuclear power in the UK, Energy Policy 62 (2013) 431-442.   DOI
23 A. Grubler, The costs of the French nuclear scale-up: a case of negative learning by doing, Energy Policy 38 (2010) 5174-5188.   DOI
24 S. Vyas, Causes of delay in project construction in developing countries, Indian J. Construct. Manag. Stud. 4 (2013) 24-29.
25 S.A. Assaf, S. Al- Hejji, Causes of delay in large construction projects, Int. J. Project Manag. 24 (2006) 349-357.   DOI
26 International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Nuclear Energy Series No. NP-T-2.7, Project Management in Nuclear Power Plant Construction: Guidelines and Experience, Vienna, 2012.
27 KPMG International, Construction Risk in New Nuclear Power Projects - Eyes Wide Open, 2011. kpmg.com/ infrastructure.
28 Project Management Institute (PMI), A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge ($PMBOK^{(R)}$ Guide), fifth ed., 2013.
29 S.C. Ward, Assessing and managing important Risks, Int. Project Manag. 17 (1999) 331-336.   DOI
30 ISO GUIDE 73, Risk Management - Vocabulary, 2009.
31 R.J. Chapman, The controlling influences on effective risk identification and assessment for construction design management, Int. Project Manag. 19 (2001) 147-160.   DOI
32 P. Elkington, C. Smallman, Managing project risks: a case study from the utilities sector, Int. Project Manag. 20 (2002) 49-57.   DOI
33 B.W. Boehm, Software risk management: principles and practices, IEEE Software 8 (1991) 32-41.   DOI
34 I. Ruuska, T. Ahola, K. Artto, G. Locatelli, M. Mancini, A new governance approach for multi-firm projects: lessons from Olkiluoto 3 and Flamanville 3 nuclear power plant projects, Int. J. Project Manag. 29 (2011) 647-660.   DOI
35 D.F. Cooper, S. Grey, G. Raymond, P. Walker, Project Risk Management Guidelines: Managing Risk in Large Projects and Complex Procurements, John Wiley & Sons Ltd, The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex PO19 8SQ, England, 2005.
36 S. Aminbakhsh, M. Gunduz, R. Sonmez, Safety risk assessment using analytic hierarchy process (AHP) during planning and budgeting of construction projects, J. Saf. Res. 46 (2013) 99-105.   DOI
37 R. Mehdizadeh, Dynamic and Multi-perspective Risk Management of Construction Projects Using Tailor-made Risk Breakdown Structures, Doctoral Thesis, Universite de Bordeux, 2012.