Generic Design Assessment of Long-Term Spent Fuel Storage for New Reactors in the UK

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Watson ◽  
I. Streatfield ◽  
C. Grundy ◽  
S. Price-Water ◽  
D. Glazbrook ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Radioactive Waste ◽  
Waste Management ◽  
Assessment Process ◽  
Spent Fuel ◽  
Radioactive Waste Management ◽  
Design Assessment ◽  
Safety Issues ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Generic Design

In the UK the Office for Nuclear Regulation and the Environment Agency developed the Generic Design Assessment process in response to a request from the UK Government. The process allows the regulators to jointly assess new nuclear reactor designs, in advance of any site-specific proposals to build a nuclear power station. Two reactor types are currently being assessed within Generic Design Assessment: • AREVA and Electricite´ de France’s UK EPR®; • Westinghouse Electric Company’s AP1000®. This paper will present the outcome of the assessment of radioactive waste management within the Generic Design Assessment process. One aspect of particular interest is the management of spent fuel from proposed new reactors as the assessment is based on an assumption that it will be sent for disposal. Therefore the paper will specifically consider the management of spent fuel and how this affects the regulatory decisions. The paper will look at four aspects. The first of these is to give a short overview of the Generic Design Assessment process. This will be followed by a summary of the Generic Design Assessment Radioactive Waste Management assessment on the acceptability of: • The types of waste and spent fuel. • The plans for conditioning of the wastes. • The safety issues associated with short-term storage. • The safety issues associated with long-term storage. • The issues associated with the disposal of the wastes. • The safety issues associated with decommissioning the reactors. The third aspect will be to look at the work commissioned by the Office of Nuclear Regulation in support of the Generic Design Assessment of radioactive waste management and how this has affected the regulatory decisions. This work has looked at the long-term stability of spent fuel in storage and the potential faults associated with the storage and handling of the spent fuel. The paper will end with the main conclusions of the radioactive waste management assessment within Generic Design Assessment. Looking at how storage of spent fuel can affect transport, disposal and decommissioning and how work by licensees could alter these conclusions.

Current Status of the Radioactive Waste Management Programme in Spain

2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jorge Lang-Lenton Leo´n ◽  
Emilio Garcia Neri
Keyword(s):  
Radioactive Waste ◽  
Waste Management ◽  
Management Programme ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Spent Fuel ◽  
Radioactive Waste Management ◽  
Set Up ◽  
Intermediate Storage ◽  
Term Management

Since 1984, ENRESA is responsible of the radioactive waste management and the decommissioning of nuclear installations in Spain. The major recent challenge has been the approval of the Sixth General Radioactive Waste Plan (GRWP) as “master plan” of the activities to be performed by ENRESA. Regarding the LILW programme, the El Cabril LILW disposal facility will be described highlighting the most relevant events especially focused on optimizing the existing capacity and the start-up of a purpose–built disposal area for VLLW. Concerning the HLW programme, two aspects may be distinguished in the direct management of spent fuel: temporary storage and long-term management. In this regards, a major challenge has been the decision adopted by the Spanish Government to set up a Interministerial Committee for the establishment of the criteria that must be met by the site of the Centralized Intermediate Storage (CTS) facility as the first and necessary step for the process. Also the developments of the long-term management programme will be presented in the frame of the ENRESA’s R&D programme. Finally, in the field of decommissioning they will be presented the PIMIC project at the CIEMAT centre and the activities in course for the decommissioning of Jose´ Cabrera NPP.

UKAEA, Dounreay: LLW Long Term Strategy — Developing the Options

2003 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Broughton
Keyword(s):  
Radioactive Waste ◽  
Waste Management ◽  
Corporate Strategy ◽  
Radioactive Waste Management ◽  
External Stakeholder ◽  
Nuclear Decommissioning ◽  
Site Restoration ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Scottish Executive

UKAEA’s mission at its Dounreay establishment in the north of Scotland is to restore the site so that it can be used for other purposes, with a minimal effect on the environment and requiring minimal attention by future generations. A Dounreay Site Restoration Plan (DSRP) has been produced. It sets out the decommissioning and radioactive waste management activities to restore the site within the next 60 years. Management of solid low level radioactive waste (LLW) that already exists, and that which will be produced as the DSRP progresses is an essential site restoration activity. Altogether around 150,000m3 (5.3Mft3) of untreated LLW could arise. This will then need to be treated, packaged and managed, the resulting volume being around 200,000m3 (7Mft3). A project to develop a long term strategy for managing all Dounreay’s existing and future LLW was initiated in 1999. The identification of complete solutions for management of LLW arising from the site restoration of Dounreay, an integrated reactor and reprocessing site, is novel in the UK. The full range of LLW will be encountered. UKAEA is progressing this specific project during a period when both responsibility and policy for UK decommissioning and radioactive waste management are evolving in the UK. At present, for most UK nuclear operators, there are no recognised routes for disposing of significant volumes of decommissioning LLW that has either lower or higher radioactivity than the levels set by BNFL for disposal at the UK national LLW disposal site at Drigg. A large project such as this has the potential to affect the environmental and social conditions that prevail in the area where it is implemented. Local society therefore has an interest in a project of this scale and scope, particularly as there could be a number of feasible solutions. UKAEA is progressing the project by following UK established practice of undertaking a Best Practicable Environmental Option (BPEO) study. UKAEA has no preconceptions of the outcome and is diligently not prejudging issues prematurely. The BPEO process draws experts and non-experts alike into the discussions and facilitates a structured analysis of the options. However to permit meaningful debate those options have to be at first generated, and secondly investigated. This has taken UKAEA two and a half years in technical assessment of options at a cost of around £23/4M. The options and issues have been investigated to the depth necessary for comparisons and valid judgements to be made within the context of the BPEO study. Further technical evaluation will be required on those options that eventually emerge as the BPEO. UKAEA corporate strategy for stakeholder participation in BPEO studies is laid out in “Restoring our Environment”, published in October 2002. This was developed by a joint approach between project managers, Corporate Communications, and discussion with the regulators, government departments and Scottish Executive. An Internal Stakeholder Panel was held in March 2003. The Panel was independently facilitated and recorded. Eight Panel members attended who provided a representative cross-section of people working on site. Two External Stakeholder Panels were held in Thurso at the end of May 2003. A Youth Stakeholder Panel was held at which three sixth form students from local High Schools gave their views on the options for managing Dounreay’s LLW. The agenda was arranged to maximise interactive discussion on those options and issues that the young people themselves considered important. The second External Stakeholder Panel was based on the Dounreay Local Liaison Committee. Additional participants were invited in acknowledgement of the wider issues involved. As the use of Drigg is an option two representatives from the Cumbrian local district committee attended. From all the knowledge and information acquired from both the technical and stakeholder programmes UKAEA will build up the objective line of argument that leads to the BPEO emerging. This will be the completion of this first stage of the project and is planned for achievement in March 2004. Once the BPEO has been identified the next stage will be to work up the applications for the authorisations that will be necessary to allow implementation of the BPEO. Any facilities needed will require planning permission from the appropriate planning authority. The planning application could be called in by a Minister of State or a planning inquiry convened. During this next stage attention will be paid to ensure all reports and submissions are consistent and compliant with regulations and possible future legal processes. Stakeholder dialogue will continue throughout this next stage moving on from disussion of options to the actual developments. The objective will be to resolve as many issues stakeholders might raise prior to the submissions of applications and prior to the regulators’ formal consultation procedures. This will allow early attention to those areas of concern. Beyond the submission of applications for authorisations it is unwise to speculate as nuclear decommissioning will be then organised in the UK in a different way. The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority will most probably be in overall control and, particularly for Dounreay, the Scottish Executive may have developed its policy for radioactive waste management in Scotland.

Strategic Environmental Assessment and Environmental Impact Assessment as Part of a Stepwise Decision Making Process

2003 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Atherton ◽  
Ann McCall
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Environmental Impact ◽  
Radioactive Waste ◽  
Waste Management ◽  
Impact Assessment ◽  
Environmental Assessment ◽  
Strategic Environmental Assessment ◽  
Radioactive Waste Management ◽  
The Uk

Nirex is the organisation responsible for long-term radioactive waste management in the UK. Our Mission is to provide the UK with safe, environmentally sound and publicly acceptable options for the long-term management of radioactive materials. One of the lessons that Nirex has learned from previous experience in the UK and internationally is the importance of developing due process for finding a long-term solution for radioactive waste management. We have been investigating best practice in this area and incorporating the findings into the work that we undertake. Projects which will have an impact on the environment are subject to EC Directives on Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) and Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). The EIA Directive has already been implemented into law within Member States while the SEA Directive has to be implemented by 2004. Nirex believes that radioactive waste management programmes will have to adhere to the principles outlined in the Directives. Nirex has been investigating how the frameworks set out in the Directives could be used to: • Develop a stepwise approach to decision making in the UK; • Engage stakeholders during the stepwise decision making; • Enable stakeholders’ issues and concerns to be addressed. This paper will outline how Nirex has been developing its work in these areas including reference to the Nirex Involvement Programme, which uses different consultation and dialogue techniques to enable people to engage with Nirex’s work programme.

Long-Term Issues for Indefinite Surface Storage of Intermediate and Some Low Level Radioactive Waste in the UK

2003 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samantha King
Keyword(s):  
Radioactive Waste ◽  
Waste Management ◽  
Radioactive Wastes ◽  
Management Option ◽  
Radioactive Waste Management ◽  
Scoping Study ◽  
Low Level ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Term Management

Nirex is the organisation responsible for long-term radioactive waste management in the UK. Our mission is to provide the UK with safe, environmentally sound and publicly acceptable options for the long-term management of radioactive materials. Nirex is therefore researching various options for the long-term management of radioactive wastes/materials in order to identify the relevant issues with regard to the feasibility of options, and the research, development and stakeholder dialogue necessary to address these issues. The UK policy for the long-term management of solid radioactive waste is currently undergoing review. In September 2001, the UK Government Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) and the Devolved Administrations for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland launched a public consultation on ‘Managing Radioactive Waste Safely’ (MRWS) [1]. The aim of this consultation was to start a process that will ultimately lead to the implementation of a publicly acceptable radioactive waste management policy. The MRWS programme of action proposed by Government includes a “stakeholder” programme of public debate backed by research to examine the different radioactive waste management options, and to recommend the preferred option, or combination of options. The options of storage above ground and underground are expected to be among the options examined. In the UK, radioactive wastes are currently held in surface stores, at over 30 locations in the UK, pending a decision on their long-term management. These stores were originally designed to have lifetimes of up to 50 years, but due to uncertainty regarding the longer term management of such wastes, extending the life of stores to 100 years is now being considered. This paper describes a preliminary scoping study to identify the long-term issues associated with surface storage of intermediate-level radioactive waste (ILW), and certain low-level waste (LLW) indefinitely in the UK. These wastes contain radionuclides with half lives that can range up to a million years or more, it was therefore assumed, for the purposes of this scoping study, that wastes would need to be managed over a period of at least one million years. An indefinite surface storage concept will require institutional stability and encompasses the principle of guardianship. It is based on a rolling present where each generation is required to monitor and, as necessary, repackage the waste and refurbish/replace storage buildings over a period of at least one million years. Each generation will also need to decide whether to continue with surface storage or implement another long-term management option. The aims of the scoping study were to: i) Investigate the implications of indefinite surface storage of waste packages through consideration of the facility specification, design and assessment. This framework is common to all Nirex radioactive waste management option studies, and provides a common basis for comparison. ii) Identify the social and ethical issues related to indefinite storage, including the principles and values that some stakeholders believe are met by the surface storage option.

Legitimacy as the Key: The Long-Term Management of Radioactive Waste in the UK

2003 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chris Murray ◽  
David Wild ◽  
Ann McCall ◽  
John Mathieson ◽  
Ben Russell
Keyword(s):  
Radioactive Waste ◽  
Waste Management ◽  
Nuclear Industry ◽  
Public Acceptance ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Radioactive Waste Management ◽  
The Creation ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Term Management

This paper provides an overview of the current status of radioactive waste management in the UK from the point of view of Nirex, the organisation responsible for providing safe, environmentally sound and publicly acceptable options for the long-term management of radioactive materials. Essentially, it argues that: • the waste exists and must be dealt with in an ethical manner; • legitimacy is the key to public acceptance of any attempt to solve the waste issue; and • credible options and a new political will allow, and indeed, compel this generation to deal with it. In doing this, the paper takes account of a number of recent announcements and ongoing developments in the UK nuclear industry, in particular: • the recent announcement that Nirex is to be made independent of industry; • the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and Devolved Administrations’ Managing Radioactive Waste Safely consultation exercise; • the creation of the Committee on Radioactive Waste Management to oversee the consultation; • the creation of the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority to manage the civil nuclear site clean-up programme; • proposals for improved regulation of Intermediate Level Waste conditioning and packaging; and • proposals by the European Commission for a new radioactive waste Directive. These institutional and policy changes amount to an evolution of the back-end of the fuel cycle that represents the most radical transformation in the UK nuclear industry for many years. In a large part, this is a transformation made necessary by past failures in trying to impose a solution on the general public. Therefore, in order for these changes to result in a successful long-term radioactive waste management programme, it is necessary to pay as much attention to political and social concerns as scientific and technical ones. Primarily it is crucial that all parties involved act in an open and transparent manner so that the decisions made achieve a high degree of legitimacy and thus public acceptance. Crucially too, the problem must be framed in the correct term — that the waste exists irrespective of the future of nuclear power and that this is an issue that must be addressed now. Thus there is a legitimacy of purpose and scope in moving forward that addresses the ethical imperative of this generation dealing with the waste. Put together with the action the government is taking to create the necessary institutional framework, Nirex believes that for the first time in a generation the UK has the building blocks in place to find a publicly acceptable, long-term solution for radioactive waste.

Integrating Natural and Social Sciences to Inspire Public Confidence in Radioactive Waste Policy Case Study: Committee on Radioactive Waste Management

2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sam Usher
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Radioactive Waste ◽  
Waste Management ◽  
Stakeholder Engagement ◽  
Public Confidence ◽  
Radioactive Waste Management ◽  
Waste Policy ◽  
The Uk

Implementing effective long-term radioactive waste management policy is challenging, and both UK and international experience is littered with policy and programme failures. Policy must not only be underpinned by sound science and technical rationale, it must also inspire the confidence of the public and other stakeholders. However, in today’s modern society, communities will not simply accept the word of scientists for setting policy based purely on technical grounds. This is particularly so in areas where there are significant social and ethical issues, such as radioactive waste disposal. To develop and implement effective policy, governments, waste owners and implementing bodies must develop processes which effectively integrate both complex technical and scientific issues, with equally challenging social and ethical concerns. These integrating processes must marry often intricate technical issues with broad public and stakeholder engagement programmes, in programmes which can expect the highest levels of public scrutiny, and must invariably be delivered within challenging time and budget constraints. This paper considers a model for how such integrating processes can be delivered. The paper reviews, as a case study, how such challenges were overcome by the Committee on Radioactive Waste Management (CoRWM), which, in July 2006, made recommendations to the UK government for the establishment of a long-term radioactive waste policy. Its recommendations were underpinned by sound science, but also engendered public confidence through undertaking the largest and most significant deliberative public and stakeholder engagement programme on a complex policy issue in the UK. Effective decision-making was enabled through the integration of both proven and bespoke methodologies, including Multi-criteria Decision Analysis and Holistic assessments, coupled with an overarching deliberative approach. How this was managed and delivered to programme demonstrates how important effective integration of different issues, interests and world views can be achieved, and the paper looks forward to how the continued integration of both natural and social sciences is essential if public confidence is to be maintained through implementation stages. This paper will be particularly relevant to governments, waste owners and implementing bodies who are responsible for developing and implementing policy.

The British Radwaste Information Management System (BRIMS)

2003 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian Upshall
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Radioactive Waste ◽  
Waste Management ◽  
Information Management ◽  
Management System ◽  
Management Strategy ◽  
Information Management System ◽  
Radioactive Waste Management

The creation and subsequent access to accurate information is widely accepted as a vital component of a national radioactive waste management strategy. Information on the origin and quantity of the waste together with its physical, chemical and radiological characteristics provides a catalyst for sound and transparent decision making. This information will originate from a number of potentially disparate sources, including material manufacturers, facility operators, waste producers, Government and Non-Government organisations and regulators. The challenge to those with a role in information management in further increased by the fact that much of the information created is required to support activities, not only in the immediate future, but also in the longer-term — typically many decades or even centuries. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has published a number of guidance documents under the Safety Series, one of which makes direct reference to information management. The document [1] is intended to assist Member States in the development of a national system for radioactive waste management and identifies the key responsibilities and essential features of such a system. The following statement appears in Section 5: “The regulatory body, the waste generators and the operators of radioactive waste management facilities should maintain documentation and records consistent with the legal requirements and their own needs.” An essential requirement of these ‘documents and records’ is that they should be “...kept in a condition that will enable them to be consulted and understood later by people different from, and possibly without reference to, those who generated the records ...” The scope of the documentation and records to be kept will be wide ranging but will include “...an inventory of radioactive waste, including origin, location, physical and chemical characteristics, and, as appropriate a record of radioactive waste removed or discharged from a facility”, and “site plans, engineering drawings, specifications and process descriptions ... radioactive waste package identification ...”. It is has long been recognised in the United Kingdom that the management of radioactive waste will require the assembly and secure retention of a diversity of records and data. This information will be needed to inform the strategic decision making process, thus contributing to the future safe, environmentally sound and publicly acceptable management of radioactive waste. In the meantime it will also service the nation’s international commitments. When the planning application for a Rock Characterisation Facility (RCF) was refused and the subsequent Nirex appeal rejected in 1997, it was recognised that transfer of waste to a national repository was ulikely to take place for many decades. The long-term preservation of information by the waste management organisations thus became an issue. Since this time, the UK nuclear industry, including the waste producers, regulators and other Government Departments have worked together to develop a common information management system that is now being implemented. It is based on an Oracle database and is supported by ‘electronic tools’ designed to facilitate entry and retrieval of data in a common format. Long-term access to these data underpins many aspects of the system design. Designing such a system and seeing through its development has been a challenge for all those involved. However, as the project nears the completion of the development phase, it is clear there are several benefits in this approach. These include a sharing of best practice, shared development costs, an improved understanding of the needs of all parties, and the use of a common platform and tools. The ‘partnership approach’ between waste management organisations, Government departments and regulators will also reduce the likelihood of future surprises or conflicts of interest. Industry-wide co-operation also provides a greater degree of confidence that the system will continue to enjoy technical and financial support for the foreseeable future. The British Radwaste Information Management System (BRIMS) is supported by the principal waste producers, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA), the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate (NII) and United Kingdom Nirex Limited (Nirex). All organisations that have participated in its development over the past seven years have free access to it and may use it as part of their waste management strategy.

Management of Institutional Radioactive Waste in Lithuania

2003 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Poskas ◽  
J. E. Adomaitis ◽  
R. Kilda
Keyword(s):  
Radioactive Waste ◽  
Waste Management ◽  
Former Soviet Union ◽  
Effective Control ◽  
Surface Barrier ◽  
Radioactive Waste Management ◽  
Near Surface ◽  
Interim Storage ◽  
Storage Facilities

The growing number of radionuclide applications in Lithuania is mirrored by increasing demands for efficient management of the associated radioactive waste. For the effective control of radioactive sources a national authorization system based on the international requirements and recommendations was introduced, which also includes keeping and maintaining the State Register of Sources of lonising Radiation and Occupational Exposure. The principal aim of the Lithuania’s Radioactive Waste Management Agency is to manage and dispose all radioactive waste transferred to it. Radioactive waste generated during the use of sources in non-power applications are managed according to the basic radioactive waste management principles and requirements set out in the Lithuanian legislation and regulations. The spent sealed sources and other institutional waste are transported to the storage facilities at Ignalina NPP. About 35,000 spent sealed sources in about 500 packages are expected until year 2010 at Ignalina NPP storage facilities. The existing disposal facility for radioactive waste from research, medicine and industry at Maisiagala was built in the early 1960’s according to a concept typical of those applied in the former Soviet Union at that time. SKB (Sweden) with participation of Lithuanian Energy Institute has performed assessment of the long-term safety of the existing facility. It was shown that the existing facility does not provide safe long-term storage of the waste already disposed in the facility. Two alternatives were defined to remedy the situation. A first alternative is the construction of a surface barrier and a second one is a retrieval solution, whereby the already stored waste will be retrieved for conditioning, characterisation and interim storage at Ignalina NPP. Facilities for the processing of the institutional radioactive waste are required before submittal to Ignalina NPP for storage, since the present facilities are inadequate. Feasibility study to establish a new central facility has been performed by SKB International Consultants (Sweden) with participation of Lithuanian Energy Institute. This study has identified the process applied and equipment needed for a new facility. Reference design and Preliminary Safety Assessment have also been performed. Plans for the interim storage and disposal of the institutional waste are described in the paper. The aspects of finging safe disposal solutions for spent sealed sources in a near surface repositories are also discussed.

Radioactive Waste: Show Time?

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hans Code´e ◽  
Ewoud Verhoef
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Radioactive Waste ◽  
Waste Management ◽  
Local Population ◽  
Living Environment ◽  
Radioactive Waste Management ◽  
Long Term Storage ◽  
Capital Growth ◽  
And Control

Time will render radioactive waste harmless. How can we manage the time radioactive substances remain harmful? Just ‘wait and see’ or ‘marking time’ is not an option. We need to isolate the waste from our living environment and control it as long as necessary. For the situation in the Netherlands, it is obvious that a period of long term storage is needed. Both the small volume of waste and the limited financial possibilities are determining factors. Time is needed to let the volume of waste grow and to let the money, needed for disposal, grow in a capital growth fund. An organisation such as COVRA — the radioactive waste organisation in the Netherlands — can only function when it has good, open and transparent relationship with the public and particularly with the local population. If we tell people that we safely store radioactive waste for 100 years, they often ask: “That long?” How can we explain the long-term aspect of radioactive waste management in a way people can relate to? In this paper, an overview is given of the activities of COVRA on the communication of radioactive waste management.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document