llw challenges and developments final pptx

International Atomic Energy Agency

LLW disposal:

trends, developments and

challenges

P. Ormai

IAEA, Waste Technology Section

International Workshop on the Safe Disposal of Low Level Radioactive Waste, 3-5 Febr. 2015, Montrouge, France


Topics

• Introductory remarks

• Trends in LLW disposal

• Latest developments

• LLW disposal challenges

• IAEA’ involvement


Source of information

• DISPONET network (meetings,

web site)

• WES projects (ISAM, ASAM,

PRISM, PRISMA, HIDRA)

• TC national, regional, inter-

regional projects

• Document preparation

• Member States reporting (Joint

Convention)

• IAEA data bases

IAEA activities

WES: Waste and Environmental Safety Section

DISPONET: International Network for the Disposal of Low-level Radioactive Waste

ISAM: Improvement of Safety Assessment Methodologies for Near‐surface Disposal Facilities

ASAM: Application of Safety Assessment Methodologies for Near Surface Waste Disposal Facilities

PRISM: Practical Illustration and Use of the Safety Case Concept in the Management of Near-Surface Disposal

PRISMA: Application of the Practical Illustration and Use of the Safety Case Concept in the Management of Near-Surface Disposal

HIDRA: Human Intrusion in the context of Disposal of Radioactive Waste


1. TRENDS

Long road from the beginning to the current disposal practices

What makes the differences? Not only the looks!

Several disposal facilities were entered into operation before current

regulatory standards took effect and IAEA requirements and guidance,

SA methodologies and recommendations for QM systems became available.

Tumble tipping


LLW disposal by now is a matured practice

• Coherent safety regime • The safety principles and safety requirements to be applied in all

RWM activities including disposal are established (SF-1, GSR Part 5,

SSR-5)

• There is a great deal of experience in LLW disposal

• Good operation records • more than 100 LLW repositories are in operation all over the world

• some of them have already been safely closed down

• Commensurate with the diverse range of wastes, a diverse range of

disposal solutions have been implemented and proposed for the

broad range of LLW


• Many ways to design disposal facility: different geometries,

different configurations, different materials

• Different disposal systems have been developed, but no

unique design – several types suitable for different

conditions

• Repository type/design depends on:

• overall disposal strategy in the country (how many facilities?)

• political decisions

• legislative restrictions

• waste inventories

• nature of the site (host media) and its surroundings

• social acceptance

• climate


Trench type disposal facilities

NTS - Area 5 (USA)

Peña Blanca (USA)

Richland (USA)

Ezeiza (Argentina)

Vaalputs (South Africa)

L’Aube (France)

El Cabril (Spain)

7

Australia


Engineered near-surface disposal concepts

La Manche, France El Cabril, Spain Mochovce, Slovakia

L’Aube (CSA), France

Rokkasho, Japan

Beilong, China

NorthWest, USA

Dukovany, Czech

8

Drigg, UK


Subsurface facilities, geologic repository

SFR, Sweden Olkiluoto, Finland

Bátaapáti, Hungary Morsleben, Germany

9

LOVIISA - Finland

HIMDALEN - Norway


• There is no “best” design for a LLW disposal facility

• The design should reflect the circumstances and the level

of hazard or risk

• Technical options based on compliance with national

policies, available funding and public sensitivities.

• Appropriate selection and optimization of technical options is

important in terms of safety, economics and efficiency

• Available technologies must be assessed.

Lessons learnt on disposal option selection


Evolving recognitions (1)

• Adaptive approach is preferred • Meeting safety requirements should be commensurate with the hazard

associated with the waste and the longevity of the hazard (graded approach).

• Disposal facilities adapted to particular waste streams (VLLW, LLW, ILW,

DSRS, NORM).

• Safety case, safety assessment

• SA cannot, itself, adequately demonstrate the safety of the disposal system

• A holistic view is needed, with a broader range of arguments and activities to

justify disposal of RW (safety case)

• Decision making at different stages in the facility lifecycle, using the Safety

Case

• Understand the processes (colloids, complexing agent, corrosion, gas

generation, sorption of nuclides onto barrier materials)


Evolving recognitions (2)

• Effective governance in disposal programmes is vital (transparent

decision making, adaptive, flexible, collaborative approach) • Public participation in environmental impact assessment (EIA) ensures an open, balanced

process and strengthens the quality and credibility of a project's review.

• Important idea of translation of ‚siting’ to ‚hosting’ a repository whereby a local

community is empowered

• While the safety is the unchallengeable priority, the cost implication of the

disposal has come to the forefront in most of the disposal development

programmes

• Cost (assessment): in relation to optimisation and improved efficiency

• The notion of the best (‚optimal’) disposal solution is elusive

Deciding what would be an optimal solution is complicated by many factors (e.g., policy

constraints, and public acceptance, siting constraints, the specific waste streams,

resources available)

• Continual improvements in disposal are imperative


Continual improvements

• A number of countries have already initiated or planning R&D

studies: • for increasing knowledge and confidence in safe operation

• enhance and strengthen the plausibility and robustness of disposal safety

case (enhancing confidence in safety case)

• deepen and strengthen stakeholder confidence

• Priorities of a R&D programme • improve knowledge of waste characteristics

• information on time development of the EB structures

• EB degradation and structural stability

• reduce identified uncertainties

• confirm the assumed performance of the disposal system

• optimise the system by increasing performance and robustness of

performance of the disposal system in cases of failures

• stay abreast of international developments and best practices on SAs and SCs


‚Matured’ disposal

facilities

Facilities in design or

construction phase

Disposal facility need

refurbishment and / or safety

upgrading

2. LATEST DEVELOPMENTS


Expansion, disposal optimization (driver: cost)

• France • enable a safe industrial disposal of large components

• filling optimization of cell

• rubble recycling

• UK

• volume reduction program

• disposal of high-volume low activity waste (VLLW) at

appropriately licensed commercial hazardous waste landfill sites

• Sweden

• extension of SFR

• extra tunnel for the RPVs

• Hungary • Optimizing the tunnel filling

‚Matured’ disposal facilities


Current projects and future plans

Talmessi, Iran

Vrbina, Krško (Slovenia)

Dessel (Belgium)

Wolsong, Korea

Radiana, Bulgaria

Switzerland

Russian Fed., Brasil

Jordan, Turkey, Pakistan, Bangladesh

Phillipines, Malaysia, Ghana: plans for borehole disposal is in

progress

Kinkardine,Canada

Konrad, Germany

Saligny, Romania

Lithuania


3. CHALLENGES

A. continuous or recurring challenges

B. new challenges

C. challenges remained from the past

• safety

• regulatory

• engineering

• economic

• societal


A. Continuous or recurring challenges

Issues for ‚mature’ disposal facilities: • maintain safe operation – maintain the public confidence

• optimise management route - integrated view

• re-licensing

• handle new waste streams

• expansion (add new disposal units)

• prepare for closure – demonstration of safety concept

• preserve memory

• Issues for new disposal facilities • Siting (stakeholder interaction), licensing,…

• ‚Evergreen’ topics for LLW disposal • Demonstration safety (SA, safety case)

• human intrusion

• managing uncertainties

• managing ‚hotspots’, inhomogeneity (ASAM project)

• Derivation and verification of WAC

• Monitoring / surveillance programme


B. New challenges

• New types of waste, new regulations or guides, new events

• With the expanding nuclear industry and the increased age of nuclear

plants, some categories of waste that were of minor importance in the

past are now becoming significant and require adequate attention.

Examples are: • LLW from decommissioning and dismantling of old nuclear installations

• radioactive graphite from nuclear reactors, amount to over 3,000 tonnes per

reactor (14C and 36Cl)

• chemotoxic or biotoxic materials possibly present in various types of wastes

• sodium and sodium/potassium alloys, which arise from the

decommissioning of liquid metal fast reactors (LMFR)


END POINT

Decay

storage

Surface

trench

Tailing

dam

Engineered

surface

facility

Intermediate

depth facility

Geologic

repository BOSS

DSRS

Short-lived

Long-lived

SHARS

B1. Disposal of DSRS

Disposal options for DSRS vary depending on the activity levels and types of

radionuclides in the sources.

Borehole disposal is not a new concept

• In the former USSR: „RADON” facilities

• USA: Greater confinement boreholes (e.g. Nevada test site)

• South Africa – Pelindaba

• Western Australia – Mt Walton “Intractable Waste Facility”

• Russian Federation: large diameter borehole (LDB)


BDC concept: safety philosophy

‘Borehole facilities offer safe, simple,

economic alternative for all DSRS

Easier’ disposal derives from the small volume

and nature of the waste

No decrease in safety standards, these to be

set by national authorities, backed up by

international guidance, as usual

South Africa Demo

International Atomic Energy Agency International Atomic Energy Agency June 2010 / 22

WAC conformity checking: Radiological characterization of large size

waste packages

Source: Lucien Pillette-Cousin, AREVA TA

Handling weight : 100 - 300 tons, diameter: 2- 4 m

height : 15 - 20 m

B2. Management of bulk waste

Criteria for optimizing large component management include safety, technical,

socio-economic, economical issues


• Transport to disposal site

• abnormal load

• special arrangement

• special vehicle

• road logistics


Disposal • New configuration of the disposal unit

Long term safety aspects: • avoid ‚’hot spot’

• provide mechanical stability of the cell (grouted with a

cementitious material)

• high pH reduces corrosion rate


Operational shortages

• no WAC

• no QA/QC

• lack of appropriate monitoring

• insufficient inventory record keeping

• lack of expertise

• lack of resources

• lack of safety culture

• handling DSRS

• waste characterisation

facility degradation (erosion, inadequate

cover, deeply rooting plants or burrowing

animals, subsidence)

waste package degradation (corrosion,

effects of gas formation, biodegradation of

certain waste types)

No adequate

infrastructure

Facility evolution

C. Challenges remained from the past

Causes of safety concerns


Requirement 26: Existing disposal facilities

The safety of existing disposal facilities shall be

assessed periodically until termination of the licence.

In the event that any requirements set down in this

Safety Requirements publication are not met, measures

shall be put in place to upgrade the safety of the

facility, economic and social factors being taken into

account.


JC Article 12. EXISTING FACILITIES AND PAST

PRACTICES

„Each Contracting Party shall in due course take the

appropriate steps to review:

…the results of past practices in order to determine whether any

intervention is needed for reasons of radiation protection …”

PAST PRACTICES

CORRECTIVE ACTIONS

• Modernisation, refurbishment, infrastructure development

• Change of design (capping system, drainage system, etc.)

• Additional EBs

• Waste retrieval


Some countries still are at the very

beginning of the upgrading

process.

Some countries have successfully

solved their problems and are

assessing the obtained results.

Upgrading of waste disposal facilities

Managing historic LLW sites and

upgrading of waste disposal facilities is

performed or planned in a number of

countries.


Lessons learnt:

To make all reasonable improvements in order to upgrade the

safety of existing facilities may prove to be a much more complex

task than had initially been expected. Some issues remain, mainly

concerning:

• Selection of a solution to achieve safety;

• Long term safety considerations — the existing facilities should be

upgraded so as not to create future problems.

• Technical procedures for safe retrieval and sorting of waste;

BUT it should be and can be done!

29


Guidance for waste management following an accident or incident

Disposal of radioactive

waste resulting from a

nuclear accident

Predisposal Management of

Radioactive Waste in the Aftermath

of Severe Nuclear Accident:

Challenges, issues and lessons learned

Report on environmental

remediation after a nuclear or

radiological accidents: approaches,

tools, techniques, and equipment

A series of reports are being drafte which primarily focus on technical, economic and socio-political aspects of

waste management after emergency situation

Advance planning for waste management in the

aftermath of nuclear accidents

New priority / challenge


IAEA’ Assistance

IAEA adjusts its support to specific Member State needs:

• Support newcomer countries on disposal

• Support non nuclear countries with limited inventory of waste on

disposal

• Support enhancing knowledge on disposal (e-learning, training)

• Peer review on disposal plans

• Support on implementing a borehole disposal for very small inventories

• Demonstration of BDC concept

• Information exchange and research cooperation on any emerging

trends and needs for Member States with advanced programmes

• manage large volumes of waste as may arise after a nuclear accident

• Share experience on post accident related waste disposal


Thank you for your attention

llw challenges and developments final pptx

Documents

disposal facility

context of disposal

surface disposal hidra

surface disposal prisma

current disposal practices

overall disposal strategy

international network

safety requirements