A Preliminary Study on the Comparative Schedule Analysis of Traditional and Advanced Work Packaging Plans for Nuclear Power Plant Construction
Source abstract
Abstract
The construction of nuclear power plants (NPPs) involves complex and long-duration projects where schedule delays critically affect project performance. To overcome this challenge, Advanced Work Packaging (AWP) has emerged as a promising alternative approach. It offers a more integrated and structured way to plan and execute projects, aiming to improve efficiency and reduce the risk of delays. To evaluate the potential benefits, this preliminary study developed and compared a traditional phase-based schedule and two AWP-based schedules. Delay simulations and productivity adjustments were conducted to analyze schedule resilience and mitigation performance. The results show that AWP-based schedules enhance traceability, expand work package granularity, and improve recovery against engineering delays through structured segmentation and Workface Planning (WFP). These findings quantitatively demonstrate the potential of AWP to improve scheduling efficiency not only in NPP projects but also mega construction projects while also identifying gaps in maturity, boundary definition, and integration practices that must be addressed for broader adoption.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Technology Assessment and Management · Risk and Safety Analysis
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Nuclear Power Plant Engineering, KEPCO International Nuclear Graduate School (KINGS), 658-91 Haemaji-ro, Seosaeng-myeon, Ulju-gun, Ulsan 45014, Republic of Korea
References (31)
Show source-provided references
1. Locatelli, G. (2018). Why Are Megaprojects, Including Nuclear Power Plants, Delivered Overbudget and Late? Reasons and Remedies, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. MIT-ANP-TR-172.
2. A Framework for Identifying Causal Factors of Delay in Nuclear Power Plant Projects10.1016/j.proeng.2016.04.187 ↗
3. OECD Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) (2020). Unlocking Reductions in the Construction Costs of Nuclear: A Practical Guide for Stakeholders, OECD Publishing. NEA No. 7530.
4. Construction Schedule Delay Risk Assessment by Using Combined AHP-RII Methodology for an International Project10.1016/j.net.2014.12.019 ↗
5. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) (2020). Management of Nuclear Power Plant Projects, IAEA.
6. CII/COAA (2013). IR 272-2 Version 3.1 Vol.1: Advanced Work Packaging—Design Through Workface Execution, CII.
7. CII/COAA (2013). IR 272-2 Version 3.1 Vol.2: Advanced Work Packaging Implementation Guidance, CII.
8. CII/COAA (2013). IR 272-2 Version 3.1 Vol.3: Advanced Work Packaging Implementation Case Studies and Expert Interviews, CII.
9. CII/COAA (2015). IR 319-2: Validating Advanced Work Packaging as a Best Practice—A Game Changer, CII.
10. CII/COAA (2013). RR 272-12: Advanced Work Packaging—From Project Definition through Site Execution, CII.
11. CII/COAA (2015). RR 319-11: Transforming the Industry—Advanced Work Packaging as a Standard (Best) Practice, CII.
12. CII/COAA (2015). RS 319-1: Making the Case for Advanced Work Packaging as a Standard (Best) Practice, CII.
13. Hamdi, O. (2022). Advanced Work Packaging: Guide for Life Cycle Implementation, BookBaby.
14. Huang, Z.-K., Zeng, N.-C., Zhang, D.-M., Argyroudis, S., and Mitoulis, S.-A. Resilience Models for Tunnels Recovery After Earthquakes. Engineering, 2025. in press.10.1016/j.eng.2025.06.028 ↗
15. A framework to quantitatively assess and enhance the seismic resilience of communities10.1193/1.1623497 ↗
16. Construction Industry Institute (CII) (2025, June 17). AWP Execution Planning Guide for Projects and Organizations. Available online: https://www.construction-institute.org/.
17. Hamdi, O. (2013). Advanced Work Packaging from Project Definition Through Site Execution: Driving Successful Implementation of Workface Planning. [Master’s Thesis, University of Alberta]. Abstract.
18. A Framework to Assess the Costs and Benefits of Advanced Work Packaging in Industrial Construction10.1139/cjce-2018-0072 ↗
19. Expanding Advanced Work Packaging to Include Commissioning and Startup for Industrial Projects
20. Bridging the Gap between Engineering and Construction 3D Models in Support of Advanced Work Packaging10.1061/(ASCE)LA.1943-4170.0000419 ↗
21. Musarat, M.A., Faisal, I., Siddiq, M.Z., Altaf, A., Shah, F., Zhou, Y., and Zhang, X. (2024). Advanced Work Packaging (AWP) Implementation and Challenges in the Malaysian Oil and Gas Sector. Sustainability, 16.10.3390/su162310234 ↗
22. Rebai, A., Fakhfakh, N., and Ghedamsi, N. (2024). Barriers to Adopting Advanced Work Packaging (AWP) in Construction. Buildings, 14.10.3390/buildings14041032 ↗
23. Construction Owners Association of Alberta (COAA) (2019). EWP Readiness Playbook, COAA. Available online: https://www.coaa.ab.ca/library/awp-ewp-readiness-playbook/.
24. Choo, D., and Jung, W. (2025, January 22–23). Advanced Work Package Application for Nuclear Construction Project: Review on the Work Breakdown Structure. Proceedings of the Korean Nuclear Society (KNS) Spring Meeting, Jeju, Republic of Korea.
25. Rebai, S., Hamdi, O., Lafhaj, Z., Ouchala, H., and AlBalkhy, W. (2025). Comparative Analysis of AWP and IPD Methods: Strengths, Challenges, and Opportunities. Buildings, 15.10.3390/buildings15162893 ↗
26. Kim, S., Choi, H., Won, S., Lim, B., Son, H., Lee, K., Shin, I., Yang, M., and Yang, J. (2015). Nuclear Power Plant Business Process Modeling and Procedure Management Method. (KR 10-2015-0001923), Republic of Korea Patent, pp. 3–4.
27. Moon, B. (2009). A Study on the Application of EVMS to Nuclear PowerPlant Construction Project. [Master’s Thesis, Soongsil University].
28. Benefits and Conditions for Successful Implementation of Advanced Work Packaging in Front-End Planning and Design10.1061/JLADAH.LADR-1357 ↗
29. COAA/CII (2019). Scalable Advanced Work Packaging Report (COP-SWP-PBP-01-2019-v1), COAA/CII.
30. Project Management Institute (PMI) (2021). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK Guide).
31. Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power Co., Ltd. (KHNP) (2023). Shin-Kori Units 3 and 4 Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR), Chapter 1: General Plant Information, Revision 7, KHNP.