Division of Labour in Risk Governance: Cases of Public Deliberation for Radioactive Waste Management in the UK and Korea

2016 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 159-192
Author(s):  
Yun Jeong Lee ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Watson ◽  
I. Streatfield ◽  
C. Grundy ◽  
S. Price-Water ◽  
D. Glazbrook ◽  
...  

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.


Author(s):  
David Broughton

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.


2005 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 313-320 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keith Baverstock ◽  
David J Ball

Author(s):  
Elizabeth Atherton ◽  
Ann McCall

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.


Author(s):  
Samantha King

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.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document