THE VAN NOORDENNENS | THE INTERVIEW


NEi: Roughly, how long does it take to fully decommission a nuclear plant to greenfield status? Gerry Van Noordennen: Typically, the full decommissioning process takes about eight to 10 years from the date of shutdown. Miles Van Noordennen: Some companies, particularly from a marketing perspective, might claim shorter timelines, but in reality, that’s not accurate. Based on actual experience, eight to 10 years is a realistic timeframe. Gerry Van Noordennen: There are several examples of successfully decommissioned nuclear plants in the United States. Among the earliest were the Yankee plants. More recently, facilities like Zion and La Crosse have completed decommissioning as well. Altogether, there are about half a dozen relatively recent cases where decommissioning was completed successfully and the sites were returned to greenfield status. So, it can be done and it has been done. In the last couple of years, the conversation around these


sites has shifted. Historically, many of them have been zoned for heavy industrial use, and owners typically want to preserve that designation. Recently, however, there’s growing interest in repurposing these locations for small modular reactors (SMRs), given their existing infrastructure, access to the power grid, and proximity to water. In parallel, we’re also seeing interest in developing data centers on these sites – a global trend. A few years ago, there was a strong push for wind and solar installations, but that momentum hasn’t really carried forward in the same way. Although achieving a greenfield status is certainly


possible, in most cases, decommissioned sites tend to remain classified as brownfields. This is mainly because, in many cases, a spent fuel facility remains on site – often at the center of the power plant. This presence essentially prevents the site from reaching a final state of greenfield or unrestricted use. In these cases, certain areas of the site are declassified and repurposed relatively quickly, while the central portion of the plant, particularly where the spent fuel is stored, remains intact and under regulatory surveillance.


NEi: Does this reflect current US practice? Gerry Van Noordennen: Yes, the spent fuel, unfortunately, remains on site in storage facilities, because here in the United States, we still lack a national repository for high- level nuclear waste. At one point, Yucca Mountain in Nevada was selected as the ideal location – situated in a remote desert area near former atomic bomb testing grounds – and technically, it was well-suited. However, political opposition ultimately blocked its development. As a result, each of the 94 operating plants in the US, as well as many decommissioned ones, now maintain their own on-site storage facilities for spent fuel. Most nuclear sites are large enough that the spent fuel occupies only a small portion, often just a few acres on properties that span 100 to 200 acres or more. In many cases, the presence of spent fuel is not a barrier to new uses. In fact, some sites are located adjacent to parks or natural reserves. The spent fuel is stored securely, and its footprint is small enough that it rarely interferes with other forms of development or public use, provided appropriate boundaries and regulations are maintained. In planning for the future, the assumption tends to be that the spent fuel will remain in place indefinitely, not because that’s the goal, but because that’s the practical reality in the absence of a federal solution.


NEi: What are the key decommissioning challenges?


Miles Van Noordennen: I think the biggest challenge we’ve faced over the past couple of decades has been getting everyone to agree that the site has truly been cleaned up and that it meets the 25 millirem per year standard. That process can be incredibly drawn out. Every piece of data, every survey and measurement is scrutinised, and it often becomes a painstaking, detailed review that takes a significant amount of time. Regulatory agencies want to be absolutely certain that the cleanup standard has been met, so they’ll check, double-check, and even take their own samples and conduct independent surveys. That level of scrutiny, while understandable, has consistently been the most difficult part of the decommissioning process in recent decades. As for the spent fuel storage facilities, the dry casks


are extremely robust, they’re designed to last a long time, potentially up to 150 years. Licenses for these storage systems are renewed every 20 years, and there’s a comprehensive monitoring programme in place. Every 20 years, inspections are done using cameras, for example, to examine the interior ventilation shafts and check for any signs of degradation, particularly of the steel structures. In addition to that, routine radiological surveys are conducted quarterly to ensure there are no leaks or signs of corrosion. If any paint starts to peel, for instance, maintenance crews will step in to scrape and repaint the surfaces as needed. The security measures in place are also strong, ensuring the casks remain protected against any potential interference. Once you finally reach the point where the license for


the site is officially terminated, you’re essentially clear to reuse that land for any new industrial purpose. That’s the final milestone, and once it’s achieved, the site is open for redevelopment. Gerry Van Noordennen: The most common option right now is using small modular reactors for these sites in the future. In the past, at one of the Yankee sites, we considered building a new natural gas power plant using liquefied natural gas, but that didn’t go through. These sites are usually large, anywhere from 500 to 1,000


acres, so we’ve also looked at converting portions of the property into state parks or state forests. At one site, there was even a proposal to sell a small part for a marijuana farm, but that didn’t move forward. Overall, future industrial use is what most people are


interested in. Conservation is also considered, especially if the site borders a state park or forest. In those cases, the state sometimes requests part of the land for preservation. So, that’s basically what’s happening now. Tax incentives play a significant role in encouraging the utilisation of commercial or industrial-zoned properties. Local municipalities rely heavily on the tax revenue generated and are therefore motivated to promote redevelopment or alternative industrial uses..


NEi: Is there a unified market or model for decommissioning in the US? Gerry Van Noordennen: There is no standardised model for decommissioning in the US The approach largely depends on each utility’s strategy once a nuclear plant is shut down. Ultimately, the regulatory end goal remains the same: from


the NRC’s perspective, achieving the 25 millirem per year standard, while state environmental requirements may vary. However, the path toward that goal – the methods, timeline, and management approach – differs greatly between utilities.


www.neimagazine.com | February 2026 | 25


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53