DR CLARENCE J. HARDY

Member, INSC Working Group on Radioactive Waste Management  . Secretary, ANA

RY.The INSC is an international group of 42 nuclear societies with the aim of promoting the peaceful  uses of nuclear science and technology. It has a number of working groups addressing important issues and  publishes the reports of these groups. The latest report of the working group on radioactive waste management was  published in August 2002. The main aim of the report is to provide the latest information on radioactive waste  management among the member societies and particularly to provide access to internet resources on this topic  including access to the radioactive waste management organisations in the several countries.The major topics  addressed in the report are: what is radioactive waste management?; where does radioactive waste come from?;  principles and objectives; management strategies - options and ethics; current worldwide status; international  cooperation; and international instruments, including treaties and legislation.

a. Introduction

The International Nuclear Societies Council (INSC)  is an international non-government organisation  made up of 42 nuclear societies with more than  80,000 nuclear professionals. Its main aim is to  promote the peaceful applications of nuclear science  and technology.

The INSC has a number of Working Groups to  address important nuclear issues and it publishes the  reports of thcse Groups. The latest report of the  working group on radioactive waste management  was published in August 2002. The main aim of the  report is to provide the latest information on  radioactive waste management among the member  societies and particularly to provide access to  internet resources on this topic including access to  the radioactive waste management organisations in  the several countries.

2, Contents of the Report

The major topics addressed in the report are:  0 what is radioactive waste management?;

0 where does radioactive waste come from?;

e principles and objectives;

* management strategies: options and ethics;

0 current worldwide status;

* international cooperation; and

* international instruments, including treaties

and legislation.

3. What i s  Radioactive Waste Management?

The definition of radioactive waste of the  International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has  been adopted for the purposes of the report:

Any material that contains or is contaminatedby  radionuclides at concentrations or radio-activity  levels greater than the exempted quantities  established by the competent authorities and for  which no use is foreseen.

It is recognised that different countries may have  different interpretations; however, the important part  of the definition is “for which no use is foreseen”.  Some countries, such as Japan, France and the UK,

may regard spent fuel as a resource for recycling.  Other countries, such as Finland, Sweden, the USA  and others, may regard it as a waste. The

interpretation can therefore depend as much on  national policy as well as any scientific or technical  description,  As to disposal, the report also adopts the IAEA

definition: The emplacement of waste ire an  approved specijied facili ty.... without the interetiora  of retrieval.. . .  Again, the reality of the definition depends on

government policy and public perception on the  question of retrievability. Some countries require  retrievability to be an option post-disposal. For  example, even if spent fuel was regarded as a waste  in this generation, future ones may regard it as a  resource. Radioactive waste management is therefore  about addressing both technical and socio-political  aspects.

The present report is focussed on the management  of solid radioactive waste, but many of the principles  apply to the discharges of liquid and gaseous  radioactive effluents as well. It is also recognised  that discharges from repositorics may take place over

many thousands of years and may not recognise  national boundaries. It is important that common  principles be applied around the world. The IAEA  wording is used for the main objective of radwaste

47

management:  ... to deal with radioactive waste in a manner  that protects human health and the environment  now and in the future without imposing undue  burdens on future generations.

This does not mean that radwaste disposal  solutions have to be found at any cost. We have a  responsibility also to the present generation which  has to pay for disposal to provide an environmental

solution that is economic but consistent with  providing adequate safety - an optimized solution.

2. Where does Radioactive Waste come from?

2.1 Activities producing waste - Regardless of  one’s views on nuclear issues, radioactive waste  exists and is a consequence of a number of activities:  * Nuclear power plants during operation and

decommissioning;  Nuclear propulsion, eg. ships, ice-breakers;  0 Nuclear weapons manufacture;

0 Spent fuel reprocessing;

* Contaminated waste from incidents, such as

Chernobyl and historic sites;  0 Applications in medicine and industry;

0 Enhancement of naturally occurring radio-

nuclides due to human activity, eg. drilling  mud in the oil industry.

2.2 Types of radioactive waste - Radioactive waste  consists of a variety of materials having different  chemical and physical properties containing  different levels of radioactivity. Each nation has  developed its own classification, although many have  adopted or adapted the recommendations of the  IAEA. However, the European Commission has also  proposed a classification system for use in the  European Union.

The report provides a general categorization of  waste types:  1 .

2.

3.

4.

Exempt waste: Radioactive waste that can be  safely disposed of with ordinary refuse. Some  countries define this as very low level waste  (VLLW) and provide separate disposal facilities  (eg. Andra, France).  Transition radioactive waste: A type of radio-

active waste, mainly from medical use, that will  decay within the period of temporary storage  and may then be suitable for management  outside the regulatory control system, subject to  compliance with clearance levels).  Low-level waste (LLW): Consists of trash and

debris from routine operations and

decommissioning. It is mainly material emitting  low levels o f  betdgamma radiation but may  include alpha-contaminated material.  Low- and intermediate-level waste (LILW):  (EC): In LILW the concentration o f  radio-

nuclides is such that generation of thermal

power during disposal is low and acceptable  values are site specific following safety  assessments.  Intermediate (medium)-level waste

(LW):

Waste containing higher levels of beta/  gamma contamination and sometimes alpha  emitters. There is little thermal output but this  waste usually requires remote handling. Such  waste originates from routine nuclear power

station maintenance, eg. used ion-exchange  resins and filters. Some countries do not use this  category, eg. Canada, Japan and the USA;  however, some types of ILW such as “greater

than Class c” in the USA, would equate to ILW  elsewhere.  Transuranic waste: Some countries chose to  categorize alpha-bearing waste separately, eg. in  the USA, transuranic waste (TRU) is defined as:  .... waste containing more than 100 nanocuries

of alpha-emitting transuranic isotopes, with  half lives greater than 20 years, per gram pJ  waste ...  High-level waste (HLW): This is waste with

such a concentration of radionuclides that  generation of thermal power has to be  considered during its storage and disposal (the  heat generation level is site specific and arises  mainly from treatment/ conditioning of spent  nuclear fuel).  Safety assessments are usually carried out to  determine the acceptability of disposal by any  particular route. It is important to recognize that  while classifications are useful, they will not of  themselves constrain the choice of disposal route.

2.3 How much waste is there? - Nuclear power  generation worldwide produces each year a total of  about 200,000 m3 of LILW and 10,000 m3 of HLW  (including spent fuel designated as waste).

The generation of electricity from a typical  lOOOMWe nuclear power station produces about 300  m3 of LILW per year and 30 te of HEW. In  comparison, a 1000-MWe coal-fired power plant  produces 300,000 te of ash alone each year which  contains radioactive materials and toxic heavy metals  that end up in landfill sites and in the atmosphere. A  further comparison is that in the OECD countries

about 300 million tonnes of toxic waste is produced  each year.  The IAEA compiles figures on radioactive waste  from around the world every few years and produces

reports available through its website. See the IAEA’s  Waste Management Database available on-line  following registration at:  http://www-newmdb. iaea.org/.

2.4 How is the waste transported? - It is necessary  to transport waste when the waste is produced at a  site other than the one where it is produced,

48

conditioned, stored or disposed of. Radioactive  materials are routinely and safely transported in and  between many countries by road, rail, sea and air.  The transport regulations in most countries are

consistent with the IAEA Regulations on the Safe  Transport of Radioactive Materials. These stipulate  the type of packaging that must be used, its labelling,  and permitted modes of transport. Before being  accepted, transport packages must withstand a

stringent set of tests including drop tests from  various heights, fire tests, leak tests, immersion tests,  without releasing their radio-active contents. These  requirements must prevent, even in a severe

accident, the release of radioactive material that  would give rise to an unacceptable dose to  individuals.

3.  WasteManagernent  Principles and Objectives of Radioactive

3.1 High-Level Principles - The primary objective  of radwaste management is to protect humans and  the environment, both now and in the future, from  potential hazards arising from such wastes. Many

countries have signed and ratified the Joint  Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management  and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management  (see www.iaea.org/ns/rasanet/programme/  wastesafety/Safety-Conventions). In summary, this

document states that radioactive waste shall be  managed in ways that:  1.

2.

3.

4.

5 .

6.

7.

Ensure that criticality and removal of residual  heat generated during spent fuel and radio-  active waste management are adequately  addressed.  Ensure that the generation of radioactive waste

is kept to the minimum practicable.  Take into account interdependencies among the  different steps in waste management;  Provide for effective protection of individuals,

society, and the environment by applying at the  national level suitable protective methods as  approved by the regulatory body within the  framework of its national legislation which has

due regard to internationally endorsed criteria  and standards;  Take into account the biological, chemical, and  other hazards that may be associated with  radioactive waste management;  Strive to avoid actions that impose reasonably  predictable impacts on future generations

greater than those permitted for the current  generation; and  Seek to avoid imposing undue burdens on future  generations.

3.2 Institutional Frameworks - The IAEA  provides guidance relating to the establishment of  appropriate radioactive waste management structures

within a country, highlighting the importance of  having well-defined responsibilities.

In particular,

attention is paid to the relationships between:  1. The state, responsible for policy;  2. The regulator, responsible for regulation and  licensing;  3. Waste production by industry and the like; and  4. Waste disposal by a separate waste management

organisation.  Many examples of these arrangements exist around  the world. The arrangements are generally based on  the IAEA principles. They differ in their reflection of

national differences in economic, social, political,  legal, institutional and geographic structures.  The names of the radioactive waste management  organisations in a number of countries and links to  their websites and those of associated organisations  are provided in Table 1,

3.3 Financing Schemes - The polluter-pays  principle is intended to ensure that a waste producer  makes proper provision for dealing safely with its

waste and that costs are passed on to those who  benefit from its production. Generic solutions for  financing radioactive waste disposal address the  issues of who pays and how they should pay. The

options are:  1. Waste producers, directly through a tariff  mechanism to the waste disposal organisation;  2. Electricity producers, through payments into a

fund from levies on electricity generation and  then to the waste disposal organisation; and  3. Government or third parties through subsidies to  the waste disposal organisation.  There is a general international consensus that all

liabilities (decommissioning and waste disposal)  should be ~ identified, reported and reviewed  periodically and that there should be mechanisms to  ensure funds are available to meet these liabilities  when they arise.

The long time scales associated with the design,  construction and operation of a radwaste repository  are particularly problematic in the context of changes  in technological knowledge. For further discussion of  this topic, refer to: “Future Financial Liabilities of  NuclemActivities”, OECD, 1996. The EC has also

carried out a study of financing schemes, see:  http://www.europa. eu. int/comm/energy/nuclear/  synopses.htm#18185

3.4 Beep Geological Disposal - Deep disposal in  stable geological formations is a means of safe  containment of long-lived radioactive materials  (long-lived ILW, HLW, and spent nuclear fuel) for

many thousands of years. The main route by which  radionuclides in the waste could return to the  biosphere is movement in groundwater that may  eventually reach the surface and enter the

environment.

49

Table 1. Radioactive Waste Management Organisations in Some Countries

France

Korea

Netherlands

Japan

I Russia

I Slovenia  I Spain

I Sweden  I Switzerland

http://www. dest.gov. auhadwastel

http://hades. sckcen.be

None as yet,  but law passed in 2001

enables one to be created

www.aecl.ca; www.nrcan.gc.ca;  http://www. opg. com/ops/N-waste-ma  n . asp

Posiva Oy www.posiva.fi; www.tvo.fi;

www.fortum.com; www.stuk.ii

ANDRA www.andra.fr; www.cogema.fr;

PURAM I

ENEA undertakes some functions I http://www.casaccia.enea.it I

c o w  http://www.vrom. nl/internationaY

http://www. nrg-nl. com

NUMO www.numo.org.jp; www.jnfl.co.jp;

www.miti.go.jp

I

RADON; MINATOM I www.rad0n.m; www.minatom.ru I

Agency RAO 1 www,sigov.si/arao/aarao. html I

ENRESA I www.enresa.es I

SKB

NAGRA

FCMA is the fuel cycle and materials  administration regulator; there are  plans to set up a waste management  organisation

UK Nirex Ltd

US Dept of Energy - Office of Civilian  Radioactive Waste Management for  Civil HLW; DOE Environmental  Management for TRU;

State compacts for LLW

www.fcma.aec. gov. tw;  www. taipower. co. tw

www. rw. doe, gov  www. em. doe. gov/dnfsbrpt/  www. wipp. carlsbad. nm. us/  www. envirocareutah. c o d   www. ymp. govl

50

prior to the construction and operation of a  repository, all countries would require that the  proponent, usually the waste management  organisation, go through a licensing process with the

regulators. This process is to ensure that the  operations and post-closure safety aspects are based  on sound scientific knowledge. This process is often  referred to as a performance assessment and is  usually based on detailed site characterisation.

It is necessary that the long time scales involved  (eg. possibly 300 years for a near-surface repository  or tens of thousands of years for a deep repository)  are taken into account in the conditioning and  packaging of the radioactive waste before being  placed in interim storage or sent for final disposal.  The timescale is relevant to:

1. The longevity of the engineered barriers  intended to keep the radionuclides within the  repository - mostly steel and cement for ILW or  copper or clay for a spent fuel repository.

Evidence in this area can be obtained from  the study of the survival over thousands of years  of metal (copper and iron) and concrete articles  in a variety of situations.

The rate of migration of radionuclides through  the rocks surrounding a repository (primarily by  groundwater). Usefil evidence in this area can  be obtained from natural analogues where water

has transported radionuclides through natural  geological formations for long periods.  The way that safety is assessed for human  generations living in the distant future. Work by  the IAEA and advice from the International

Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP)  has done much to build an international  consensus in this area.

2.

3.

Time Frames in Perspective - Time frames of  thousands to millions of years may be required for  safe isolation of certain wastes. Typical time frames  and events are listed below:

1-100 years Institutional control is envisaged  for this period; greenhouse gases  may affect the climate.  100-10,000yr Institutional control is assumed to

have lapsed; end date comparable  to Middle Stone Age.  lo4 - lo6 yrs Glacial / interglacial cycling is  expected; sea level could fall by

140 m in glacial periods. Note  Half-lives of 239Pu = 24,000 yr,  99Tc = 200,000 yr.  Major tectonic changes could occur,  equivalent to first appearance of

humans; '291 = 16 M yr.

> lo6 yrs

Repository markers - The USEPA regulations  require that the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP)  waste disposal site use markers and other passive  controls to indicate the location. The US DOE has  identified suitable controls and markers for a time

frame of

10,000 years, eg. granite monuments, 10 m  high; a large surface structure engraved with  messages; and archives stored at multiple US  locations.

4. Waste Management Strategies: Options  and Ethics

A number of options for radioactive waste  management have been proposed over the several  decades since planning started. The options for the  management of low- and intermediate-level waste

has been generally consistent among the many  countries which generate such waste. Differences  have arisen largely in the options to manage spent  fuel and high-level waste due to the two major

options of using a once-through fuel cycle or using  rep-ocessing of spent fuel. The latter option usually  involves the conversion of high level fission product  waste into a relatively insoluble form such as glass,  and recycle of the recovered plutonium. Options are:

1. Extended or indefinite storage.  2. Direct disposal (interim storage followed by  deep geological disposal with or without  retrievability).  3. Conventional closed-cycle (interim storage

followed by reprocessing and deep geological  disposal with or without retrievability); after  reprocessing, a geological disposal decision  could be deferred leading to extended or

indefinite storage of the high-level liquid waste  or conditioned vitrified HLW.  Advanced closed cycle (interim storage followed  by reprocessing, partition and transmutation of

minor actinides and long-lived fission products,  and deep geological disposal with or without  retrievability). After waste transmutation, a  geological disposal decision could be deferred,

leading to extended or indefinite storage of the  resulting partitioned and transmutation  residues.

4.

Partition and transmutation (P&T) - The role o f   P&T is to reduce or eliminate the quantity of long-  lived radionuclides requiring long-term management  by changing (transmuting) them into short-lived

radionuclides or stable elements. This is achieved by  using nuclear reactions, such as neutron capture in  a reactor leading to fission or radioactive decay, or  bombardment with charged particles in an  accelerator. Further research is needed to realise  these processes, and if successful, the technology  may take years to be deployed.

Long-term Surface Storage - This technology exists  and would allow the waste to be monitored easily  and to be retrieved if required. However, it implies a  commitment to active long-term management and  offers little protection against long-term risks that  could arise from a loss of social stability and control.

51





Phased Deep Geological Disposal - This option is  based on the principle that the generation that  benefited from the activities which produced the  waste should bear the cost of disposal. The safety of

a disposal facility should not depend on its long-term  maintenance (or even knowledge of its existence) by  future generations. There needs to be a degree of  flexibility not to foreclose all other options that  future generations might want to take up. A phased

approach is where the waste remains retrievable for  an extended period, provided that it does not lead to  reduced safety.  There is a consensus among experts that sites can

be identified and characterised and that deep  geological repositories can be designed so that no  short-term detriment to populations will result and  that an acceptable degree of safety can be provided  for future generations. Deep geological repositories

exist at the WIPP (Waste Isolation Pilot Plant) site in  Carlsbad, New Mexico, USA (www.wipp.ws);  Morsleben (now closed) and Konrad (licensed but  not operational) in Germany (www.dbe.de); and

several other sites are under investigation in various  countries (for websites see Table 1). One of the  major sites under investigation is at YuccaMountain  in the USA (www.ymp.gov/).

Other options - The report briefly describes a  number of other options for waste disposal.  Examples are: deep borehole disposal; direct  injection of liquids into deep rocks; rock melting in

situ; ice sheet disposal; sea disposal (used for many  years in the 1950s and 1960s but now ruled out by  international agreements); disposal into space. Of  these, only deep borehole disposal is now being

considered seriously, and this option is broadly  similar to disposal in a deep geological repository.

Ethics - Interest in the options focuses on two ethical  concerns: inter-generational equity (fairness and  equity between generations) and intra-generational  equity (fairness and equity within contemporary  generations. The Radio-active Waste Management  Committee of the OECD’s Nuclear Energy Agency  (NEA) has discussed these concerns in 1955 in its  “Opinion on the Environmental and Ethical Basis of

Geological Disposal” and given a set of principles  (see www.nea.fr).

6. International Cooperation

There are many similarities in the ways that different  countries undertake the management and disposal of  radioactive waste. There is, therefore, extensive  collaboration and exchange of information between  countries and this enables the benefits of ongoing  research to be maximised. Multi-national projects  include:

1. Studies on tunnel excavation in UREs  (Underground Research Laboratories).

2.  3.

4.

5 .

6.

7.

Validatiodverification of computer models.  Studies of movement of radionuclides in the  environment.  Studies of environments in which natural  radioactivity is high or where the hydrology is  similar to that expected in repositories.  Studies of gas generation and movement.  Studies of groundwater movement.  Studies on mineralisation of radionuclides in  cement.  Underground Research Laboratories (URLs) -  These enable geological, engineering and other  studies to be carried out at depth. They fall into two  categories: generic, where there is no intention of  using the site for an actual repository; and site  specific, in which research is focussed on the host  rock as a suitable repository. Most URLs involve  international cooperation to share the cost, eg. :

1.  2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7 .

8.

SIU3’s Asp0 hard rock laboratory in Sweden.  Atomic Energy of Canada (AECL)’s URL at  Whiteshell, Manitoba.  NAGRA’s URL at Grimsel and Mont Terri in

Switzerland.  ANDRA’s URL under construction at Bure in  France.  Yucca Mt. Experimental Studies Facility in  Nevada, USA.  Facilities within the WIPP repository in

Carlsbad, New Mexico, USA.  Tono in Japan.  Mol facility in Belgium.  European Union 6Ih R&D Framework Program -

The EU operates framework programs for shared  cost radioactive waste R&D. The 6~ Program started  in 2002. See http://europa.eu.intcomm/research/  fp6/intlex_en. html.  EDRAM (acronym for Environmental Disposal of  Radioactive Materials) - Group established in

Switzerland with a membership of 11 countries to  meet annually to exchange information.  IAEA - The IAEA undertakes coordinated research  and assistance programs in radioactive waste  management. The ILEA produced a report in 1998  in the topical but controversial area of multi-national  and international radioactive waste facilities:

“Technical, Institutional and Economic Factors  Important for Developing a Multinational  Radioactive Waste Repository”, ‘FECBOC-102 1.  The topic has also been debated in the NEA’s

RWMC (see below).  OECD Nuclear Energy Agency ~~) - The  membership includes all EU members and some  outside countries. The main aim is to coordinate  cooperation in the development of nuclear power as  a safe, environmentally acceptable and economical  energy source. Its Radioactive Waste Management

Committee (RWMC) coordinates work in this area.  Public Involvement - Past experience indicates that  establishing a radioactive waste repository is as  much a political as a technical undertaking. It i s

52



essential therefore to undertake public consultation  at all stages of management of waste and the siting,  design, construction and operation of repositories.

5. Current Worldwide Status of Disposal

Most countries using nuclear power and some

applying radionuclides in a variety of non-power  applications have well-developed strategies for  radioactive waste disposal. Rather than provide  details of the various programs and sites, the report  provides a list of sites in Table 2 (see also web sites

in Table 1 and the WasteLink Website:  (www. radwaste.org).

Table 2. Summary of Worldwide Status on Radioactive Waste Disposal

Intermediate-Level Facility

Australia I Site selection started.

Germany LILW disposed of in Morsleben deep  repository (now closed).

Puspokszilagy operated since 1976. Site  selection for new facility started in1993.

Italy

I Siting for LILW facility being discussed  Netherlands I I Storage of all waste at Vissingen,

Japan I Rokkasho-Mura facility in operation.

Russia I RADON facilities in operation.

Slovenia

Switzerland

53

Long-Lived ILW / HLW / Spent Nuclear  Fuel Deep Facility

Not applicable.

Investigations at Mol Underground  Research Laboratory; final site not chosen.

Siting program stalled.

Some siting studies underway

Test disposal at Asse salt mine. Konrad  facility for non-heat-generating waste  licensed in 2002. Gorleben work stopped.

Site chosen near Olkiluotu for  investigation by Posiva  URL investigations at Bure aimed at  Parliamentary decision on options in 2006

~~

In abeyance  ~

Siting study for deep facility in progress.

Siting %ofor storage facility being discussed.

Disposal decision deferred for 100 years.

Siting study and URL studies started.

Studies underway in Novaya Zembla.

, , . . . discussions with Croatia.

Site selection in abeyance.

Investigations underway at several sites.

Investigations underway but 110 site  chosen. Interested in international option.

Some siting studies done.

Government consultation in progress on  options following failure of ILW siting  program in 1997.

WIPP for TRU waste in operation. Yucca  Mountain Project under investigation.

7. International Instruments www.icrp.org. Recommendations made by the

Four international organisations contribute IAEA, ICRP and the O E C D N A  form the basis of  significantly to the development and statement of specific European Community directives issued by  principles for radioactive waste management: the theEC (www.europa.eu.int). They are implemented  IAEA, ICRP, O E C D N A  and the EU. in accordance with several treaties, eg. the Single

While IAEA guidelines and regulations have no European Act of 1987.  legal jurisdiction, member countries usually comply The Report provides examples of specific Treaties  with their recommendations. The ICRP is an arid International Legislation, particularly those  independent body of medical and scientific experts which apply to trans-boundary movement of  and has published recommendations on radiological  protection since 1928. For more information see

Acknowledgements - The following experts produced the Report: Dr John Matheson, Chairman, "REX, UK;  Dr Clarence Hardy, ANA; Dr Alvaro Beceiro, European Nuclear Society; Dr Osama Tochiyama, Atomic Energy  Society of Japan; Dr Der-Yu Hsia, Nuclear Energy Society of Taiwan; and Mr Jose-Luis Delgado, Mexican  Nuclear Society.

materials and waste disposal.

54

Illustrations of Major Radioactive Waste ~ a n a g e ~ e n t  Facilities

Site at Centre de l”Aube, France

Yucca Mountain Site, Nevada, USA

Entrance to one of the tunnels at Yucca Mt.

Schematic view of concrete packs  for Centre de l’Aube, France

Schematic view of Forsmark repository  for LLW and short-lived ILW, Sweden

Surface storage facility for LLW, ILW  and HLW in the Netherlands

Deep disposal of TRU waste in salt cavern  at WPP, Carlsbad, NM, USA

5 5

