DISPOSAL OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE
1.
INTRODUCTION
1.1 General
Radioactive waste arises from the generation of
electricity in nuclear power plants, from nuclear fuel cycle operations and
from activities in which radioactive material is used. It also arises from
activities and processes in which radioactive material of natural origin become
concentrated in waste material and safety needs to be considered in its
management. Radioactive waste can be generated in a wide range of activities
varying o activities in hospitals to nuclear power plants to mines and minerals
processing facilities. There is a variety of
alternatives for treatment and conditioning of the wastes prior to disposal.
Likewise, there are a number of alternatives for safe disposal of these wastes,
ranging from geological disposal to near surface disposal and direct discharge
to the environment and disposal in space. To simplify their management, a
number of schemes have evolved for classifying radioactive waste according to
the physical, chemical and radiological properties of significance to those
facilities managing this waste. These schemes have led to a variety of terminologies,
differing from country to country and even between facilities in the same
country.
The properties of radioactive waste are likewise
variable, not only in terms of radioactive content and activity concentration
but also in terms of physical and chemical properties. Its rate of generation
is also variable. Common characteristics of all radioactive waste is its
potential to present a hazard to people and the environment, and it must
therefore be managed so as to reduce any associated risks to acceptable levels.
The potential hazard can range from large to trivial; a variation reflected in
management and disposal options necessary for various types of waste.
The safety principles are applied in all activities
for radioactive waste management are set out as the requirements for radiation
protection are set out in the International basic Safety standards for protection
against Ionizing Radiation and for the safety of radiation sources. The
preferred strategy for the management of all radioactive waste is to contain it
(i.e. to confine the radionuclides to within the waste matrix, the packing and
the disposal facility) and to isolate it from the accessible biosphere.
Radioactive waste may arise initially in various
gaseous, liquid and solid forms. In waste management activities, the waste is
generally processed to produce stable and solid forms, and reduced in volume
and immobilized, as far as practicable, to facilitate their storage, transport
and disposal. Various gaseous or liquid effluents that may result from this
processing may be discharged to the environment provided that they meet the
conditions for authorized discharge.
1.2 Concepts relating to disposal (and storage)
of radioactive waste
The term ‘disposal’ refers to the emplacement of
radioactive waste into a facility or a location with no intention of retrieving
the waste. Disposal options are designed to contain the waste by means of
passive engineered and natural features and isolate it from the accessible
biosphere to the extent necessitated by the associated hazard. The term
disposal implies that retrieval is not intended; it does not mean that
retrieval is not possible.
By contrast, the term ‘storage’ refers to the
retention of radioactive waste in a facility or a location with the intention
of retrieving the waste. Both options, disposal and storage, are designed to
contain waste and to isolate it from the accessible biosphere to the extent
necessary. The important difference is that storage is a temporary measure
following which some future action is planned. This may include further conditioning
or packaging of the waste, and ultimately its disposal.
A number of design options for disposal facilities
have been developed and various types of disposal facilities have been
constructed in many States and are in operation. These
design options have different degrees of containment and isolation capability appropriate to the radioactive waste that they will receive. The specific aims of disposal are:
design options have different degrees of containment and isolation capability appropriate to the radioactive waste that they will receive. The specific aims of disposal are:
·
To contain the waste
·
To isolate the waste from accessible
biosphere and to substantially reduce the likelihood of all possible
consequences of inadvertent human intrusion into the waste.
·
To inhibit, reduce and delay the
migration of radionuclides at any time from the waste of accessible biosphere.
·
To ensure that the amounts of
radionuclides reaching the accessible biosphere due to any migration from the
disposal facility are such that possible radiological consequences are
acceptably low at all times.
Within any State or region a number of disposal
facilities of different designs may be required in order to accommodate
radioactive to of various types. The following disposal options have been
adopted in one or more States, corresponding to recognized classes of
radioactive waste. The classification of radioactive waste is discussed below:
·
Specific
landfill disposal: disposal in facility similar to a
conventional landfill facility for industrial refuse but it may incorporate
measures to cover the waste. Such a facility may be designed as a disposal
facility for very low level radioactive waste (VLLW) with low concentrations or
quantities of radioactive content. Typical waste disposed of in a facility of
this type may include soil and rubble arising from decommissioning activities.
·
Near
surface disposal: disposal in a facility consisting of
engineered trenches or vaults constructed on the ground surface or up to a few
tens of meters below ground level. Such a facility may be designated as a
disposal facility for low level radioactive waste (LLW).
·
Disposal of intermediate level waste:
Depending on its characteristics, intermediate level radioactive waste (ILW)
can be disposed of in facilities of different types. Disposal could be by
emplacement in a facility constructed in caverns, vaults or silos at least a
few tens of meters below ground level and up to a few hundred meters below
ground level. It could include purpose built facilities and facilities
developed in or from existing mines. It could also include facilities developed
by drift mining into mountainsides or hillsides, in which case the overlying
cover could be more than 100 meters deep.
·
Geological
disposal: disposal in a facility constructed in tunnels,
vaults or silos in a particular geological formation (e.g. in terms of its long
term stability and its hydro geological properties) at least a few hundred
meters below ground level. Such a facility could be designed to accept high
level radioactive waste (HLW), including spent fuel if it is to be treated as
waste. However, with appropriate design a geological disposal facility could
receive radioactive waste of all types.
·
Borehole
disposal: disposal in a facility consisting of an array of
boreholes, or a single borehole, which may be between a few tens of meters up
to a few hundreds of meters deep. Such a borehole disposal facility is designed
for the disposal of only relatively small volumes of waste, in particular
disused sealed radioactive sources. A design option of very deep boreholes,
several kilometers deep, has been examined for the disposal of solid high level
waste and spent fuel, but this option has not been adopted for a disposal
facility in any State.
·
Disposal
of mining and minerals processing waste: disposal usually on or
near the ground surface, but the manner in which and the large volumes in which
the waste arises, its physico-chemical form and its content of long lived
radionuclides of natural origin distinguish it from other radioactive waste.
The waste is generally stabilized in situ and covered with various layers of
rock and soil.
1.3 Development
of disposal facilities
The
development (i.e. the site selection and evaluation, design and construction) of
most types of disposal facility is likely to take place over extended periods
of time. The period over which disposal facilities will be operated prior to
closure will in most cases also extend over decades. Different activities will
be conducted this period of development, such as site evaluation, design and
construction, with decisions being made to proceed to the next set of
activities or the next step in the development of the facility.
Such
a step by step approach to the development enables: the ordered accumulation
and assessment of the necessary scientific and technical data; the evaluation
of possible sites; the development of disposal concepts; iterative studies for
design development and safety assessment with progressively improving data;
technical and regulatory reviews; public consultation; and politic decisions.
The
step by step approach to development, together with the consideration of a
range of options for the design and operational management of a disposal
facility, is expected to provide flexibility for responding to new technical
information and advances in waste management and material technologies. It also
enables social, economic and political aspects of the disposal facility to be
addressed, to ensure that all reasonable measures have been taken to further
prevent, inhibit or delay releases to the environment.
It
is convenient to identify three periods associated with the development,
operation and closure of a disposal facility: the pre-operational period, the
operational period and the post-closure period. Various activities will take
place in these periods and some may be undertaken to varying degrees throughout
part or all of the lifetime of the facility.
·
The pre-operational period includes
concept definition, site evaluation (selection, verification and confirmation),
safety assessment, and design studies. It also includes the development of
those aspects of the safety case for safety in operation and after closure that
are required in order to set the conditions of authorization, to obtain the
authorization and to proceed with the construction of the disposal facility and
the initial operational activities. The monitoring and testing programs that
are needed to inform operational management decisions are put in place.
·
The operational period begins when waste
is first received at the facility. From this time, radiation exposures may
occur as a result of waste management activities, and these are subject to
control in accordance with the requirements for protection and safety. Monitoring,
surveillance and testing programs continue to inform operational management
decisions, and to provide the basis for decisions concerning the closure of the
facility or parts of it. Safety assessments for the period of operation and
after closure and the safety case are updated as necessary to reflect actual
experience and increasing knowledge. In the operational period, construction
activities may take place at the same time as waste emplacement in and closure
of other parts of the facility. This period may include activities for waste
retrieval — if considered necessary — prior to closure, activities following
the completion of waste emplacement, and the final closure and sealing of the
facility.
·
The post-closure period begins at the
time when all the engineered containment and isolation features have been put
in place, operational buildings and supporting services have been
decommissioned, and the facility is in its final configuration. After its
closure, the safety of the disposal facility is provided for by means of
passive features inherent in the characteristics of the site and the facility and
characteristics of the waste packages, together with certain institutional controls,
particularly for near surface facilities. Such institutional controls are put
in place to prevent intrusion into facilities and to confirm that the disposal
system is performing as expected by means of monitoring and surveillance.
Monitoring may also be carried out to provide public assurance. The license
will be terminated after the period of active institutional control when all
the necessary technical, legal and financial requirements have been fulfilled.
2.
APPROACHES TO
RADIOACTIVE WASTE CLASSIFICATION
Classification
systems for radioactive waste may be derived from different points of view,
such as safety related aspects, process engineering demands or regulatory issues.
Classification of radioactive waste may be helpful at any stage between the arising
of the raw waste and its conditioning, interim storage, transportation and
disposal.
Therefore,
classification of radioactive waste will serve many purposes. It will help:
·
at the
conceptual level
— in devising waste management strategies;
— in planning and designing waste management
facilities;
— in designating radioactive waste to a
particular conditioning technique or disposal facility;
·
at the
operational level
— by defining operational activities and in
organizing the work with waste;
— by giving a broad indication of the potential
hazards involved with the various types of radioactive waste;
— by facilitating record keeping;
·
for
communication
— by
providing words or acronyms universally understood which improve communication
among experts from different countries, and between experts, generators and
managers of radioactive waste, regulators and the public.
2.1 Qualitative classification
There
already exist 'natural' classification systems, e.g. grouping the radioactive
wastes in terms of their origin. A great many activities involving the use of
radionuclides and nuclear power generation result in generation of radioactive
waste. Such activities include all steps in the nuclear fuel cycle (i.e. the
activities associated with the generation of nuclear power) as well as other
non-fuel-cycle activities. Radioactive waste may also be generated outside the
nuclear activities by the (mostly large scale) processing of raw materials
containing naturally occurring radionuclides which in some cases may be
considered as being radioactive. Examples include phosphate ore processing and
oil or gas exploration. The radionuclide content of radioactive waste from fuel
cycle activities greatly exceeds the radionuclide content of materials from
non-fuel cycle activities.
Another
'natural' classification system is the differentiation of radioactive wastes
according to the physical state, i.e. solid, liquid, and gaseous. This system
stems from the process engineering needs for the treatment of the different radioactive
waste streams and is often refined corresponding to individual radioactive waste
treatment systems. A classification system of this type is mostly specific to individual
facilities and follows their technical needs and possibilities. It may,
however, incorporate safety considerations such as the radiation protection
necessary for radioactive waste classes with higher radioactivity content.
A
widely used qualitative classification system separates radioactive waste into
three classes: low level waste (LLW), intermediate level waste (ILW) and high level
waste (HLW). A further distinction is made between short lived and long lived Exempt
waste.
TABLE NO. 1:
IMPORTANT PROPERTIES OF RADIOACTIVEWASTE
USED AS CRITERIA FORCLASSIFICATION
·
Origin
·
Criticality
·
Radiological
properties:
o
Half-life
o
Heat generation
o
Intensity of penetrating radiation
o
Activity and concentration of
radionuclides
o
Surface contamination
o
Dose factors of relevant radionuclides
·
Other physical properties:
o
physical state (solid, liquid or
gaseous)
o
size and weight
o
compactability
o
dispersibility
o
volatility
o
solubility, miscibility
·
Chemical
properties:
o
potential chemical hazard
o
corrosion resistance/corrosiveness
o
organic content
o
combustibility
o
reactivity
o
gas generation
o
sorption of radionuclides
·
Biological
properties:
o
potential biological hazards
2.1.2 Military and Civilian Wastes
The
first nuclear reactors were those built during World War II to produce
plutonium for weapons. In order to extract the plutonium, it is necessary to
reprocess the spent fuel, first converting it to liquid form. The residue
remaining after the plutonium and uranium (and sometimes other elements) are
extracted constitutes the reprocessed wastes. Reprocessing increases the
volume of the residue and puts it in a form that can more readily escape into
the environment. This residue was originally stored as liquids in large
underground, single-walled tanks.
Given
the pressures of wartime development, there was no well-engineered, long-term
plan for the permanent disposal or storage of these wastes. Weapons production
continued and increased after World War II, with large programs at the DOE’s
facilities at Hanford (Washington) and Savannah River (South Carolina), but
disposal plans were still not developed in a timely fashion. As a result, there
were mishaps, including large leaks from some tanks at Hanford during the
1970s, and concerns arose about possible further leaks and conceivable chemical
explosions.
These
wastes constitute the bulk of the military wastes. Nuclear reactors used on naval
vessels constitute a second, smaller source of the military wastes, but the
radioactivity levels and physical volumes involved are considerably less than
those from weapons production
Civilian
or
commercial wastes are
those produced by reactors built for commercial electricity generation. The
amount of radioactivity produced in this manner to date is much greater than
that for the military wastes, because more reactors have been involved,
operating over longer total periods. The volume is less, however, because the
wastes have remained as solid fuel rods. Overall, they are easier to handle
than the reprocessed military wastes, being in compact solid form. The focus
here will be on commercial wastes, because their successful disposal is crucial
to the future of nuclear power.
2.1.3 High
level waste
(i)
The highly radioactive liquid,
containing mainly fission products, as well as some actinides, which is
separated during chemical reprocessing of irradiated fuel (aqueous waste from
the first solvent extraction cycle and those waste streams combined with it).
(ii)
Any other waste with radioactivity levels
intense enough to generate significant quantities of heat by the radioactive decay
process,
(iii)
Spent reactor fuel, if it is declared a waste.
2.1.4 Intermediate level waste (medium level waste)
Waste
which, because of its radionuclide content requires shielding but needs little
or no provision for heat dissipation during its handling and transportation.
2.1.5 Low level waste
Waste
which, because of its low radionuclide content, does not require shielding
during normal handling and transportation. Such a condition is shown in figure
1.
Figure
1: Storage of low level waste (LLW) at ANSTO. LLW contains low levels of
radioactivity, and therefore shielding is not required to protect workers
during storage or transportation.
2.2 WASTE CLASSES
The
revised classification system is presented in Fig. 2. The principal waste
classes include exempt waste, low and intermediate level waste, which may be subdivided
into short lived and long lived waste, and high level waste.
2.2.1 Short lived waste
Short-lived
waste refers to radioactive waste which will decay to an activity level which
is considered to be acceptably low from a radiological viewpoint, within a time
period during which administrative controls can be expected to last. (Such
waste can be determined by radiological performance assessment of the storage
or disposal system chosen.)
2.2.2 Long lived waste
Long
lived waste is radioactive waste that will not decay to an acceptable activity
level during the time which administrative controls can be expected to last.
Alpha bearing waste is radioactive waste containing one or more alpha emitting
radionuclides, usually actinides, in quantities above acceptable limits
established by the national regulatory body.
Considering
Fig. 2 vertically, radioactivity levels range from negligible to very high
concentrations of radionuclides. As the level rises, there is an increased need
to isolate the waste from the biosphere; suitable disposal options may range
from simple and conventional methods to geological isolation. In addition,
there is an increased need to consider shielding from radiation, and the
generation of heat from radioactive decay.
Considering
the figure horizontally, decay periods range from short (seconds)to very long
time spans (millions of years) and similarly radioactive wastes range from
those containing minor quantities of long lived radionuclides to those containing
significant quantities thereof. As appropriate, radioactive waste may be (1) stored
for decay and then exempted, (2) disposed of in near surface facilities, or (3)
isolated from the biosphere in deep geological formations. This situation is
reflected as two subclasses of radioactive waste distinguish short lived and
long lived low and intermediate level waste.
Figure 2. Revised waste classification system
Such
a distinction between short lived and long lived low and intermediate level
waste can be of substantial benefit because the radiological hazards associated
with short lived radionuclides can be significantly reduced over a few hundred years
by radioactive decay. Different time periods for the isolation of short lived
and long lived low and intermediate level waste will be necessary. Activity
limitations for a given disposal facility will in particular depend on the
radiological, chemical, physical and biological properties of individual
radionuclides. It can by no means be implied that long lived radionuclides are
inherently more hazardous than short lived radionuclides.
2.2.3 Exempt
waste (EW)
Exempt
waste (EW) contains so little radioactive material that it cannot be considered
'radioactive' and might be exempted from nuclear regulatory control. That is to
say, although still radioactive from a physical point of view, this waste may
be safely disposed of, applying conventional techniques and systems, without
specifically considering its radioactive properties.
Below,
a more detailed discussion is presented for each of the revised waste classes.
Boundary levels between classes are presented as orders of magnitude and
typical characteristics of waste classes are summarized in Table 2.
Application
of a classification system for the management of radioactive waste implies an
adequate separation of wastes generated. A decision chart for the segregation
of radioactive and exempt waste is presented in Fig. 2.
Figure 3: decision chart
for segregation of radioactive and exempt waste.
2.3 Low
and intermediate level waste (LILW)
Low
level waste has been defined in the past to mean radioactive waste that does
not require shielding during normal handling and transportation. Radioactive
waste which required shielding but needed little or no provision for heat dissipation
was classified as intermediate level waste. A contact dose rate of 2 mSv/h was generally used to distinguish
between the two classes.
This
distinction appears of secondary importance in the present context.
Classification should be related to individual radionuclides, taking the various
exposures and exposure pathways into account, such as inhalation (e.g. in the case
of an incident) and ingestion (e.g. in the case of long term releases in the
post operational period of a repository). Thus, low and intermediate level
waste may be subdivided into short lived and long lived waste. Additional
considerations which must be taken into account in managing low and
intermediate level waste are presented subsequently under 'Additional Considerations'.
2.3.1 (a) Short lived waste (LILW-SL)
Short
lived low and intermediate level waste (LILW-SL) contains low concentrations of
long lived radionuclides. The possible hazard represented by the waste can
often be significantly reduced by administratively controlling waste as part of
storage or after disposal. Although the waste may contain high concentrations of
short lived radionuclides, significant radioactive decay occurs during the
period of institutional control. Concentrations of long lived radionuclides
that will not decay significantly during the period of institutional control
are controlled to low levels consistent with the radio toxicity of the
radionuclides and requirements set forth by national authorities.
Because
LILW-SL may be generated in a wide range of concentrations, and may contain a
wide range of radionuclides, there may be a range of acceptable disposal
methods. The waste form or packaging may also be important for management of
this waste. Depending upon safety analyses and national practices, these methods
may range from simple surface landfills, to engineered surface facilities, and to
disposal at varying depths, typically a few tens of meters or in deep geological
formations if a co-disposal of short and long lived waste is anticipated.
National practices may impose varying levels of isolation depending upon the
hazard represented by different classes of radioactive waste.
2.3.2 (b) Long lived waste (LILW-LL)
Long lived low and intermediate level waste
(LILW-LL) contains long lived radionuclides in quantities that need a high
degree of isolation from the biosphere. This is typically provided by disposal
in geological formations at a depth of several hundred meters. The boundary
between short lived and long lived waste cannot be specified in a universal
manner with respect to concentration levels for radioactive waste disposal,
because allowable levels will depend on the actual radioactive waste management
option and the properties of individual radionuclides. However, in current
practice with near surface disposal in various countries, activity
concentration is limited to 4000 Bq/g of long lived alpha emitters in
individual radioactive waste packages, thus characterizing long lived waste
which is planned to be disposed of in geological formations. This level has
been determined based on analyses for which members of the public are assumed
to access inadvertently a near surface repository after an active institutional
control period, and perform typical construction activities (e.g. constructing
a house or a road).
Applying
this classification boundary, consideration should also be given to
accumulation and distribution of long lived radionuclides within a near surface
repository and to possible long term exposure pathways. Therefore, restrictions
on activity concentrations for long lived radionuclides in individual waste packages
maybe complemented by restrictions on average activity levels or by simple operational
techniques such as selective emplacement of higher activity waste packages within
a disposal facility. An average limit of about 400 Bq/g for long lived alpha emitters
in waste packages has been adopted by some countries for near surface disposal
facilities.
In
applying the classification system, attention should also be given to inventories
of long lived radionuclides in a repository that emit beta or gamma radiation.
For radionuclides such as 129I or "Tc, allowable quantities or average concentrations
within a repository depend strongly on site specific conditions. For this reason,
national authorities may establish limits for long lived beta and gamma
emitting radionuclides based on analyses of specific disposal facilities.
2.4 High
level waste (HLW)
The
high level waste (HLW) class largely retains the definition of the existing
classification system. This waste contains large concentrations both of short
and long-lived radionuclides, so that a high degree of isolation from the
biosphere, usually via geological disposal, is needed to ensure disposal
safety. It generates significant quantities of heat from radioactive decay, and
normally continues to generate heat for several centuries.
An exact boundary level is difficult to
quantify without precise planning data for individual facilities. Specific
activities for these waste forms are dependent on many parameters, such as the
type of radionuclide, the decay period and the conditioning techniques. Typical
activity levels are in the range of
to
TBq/m3, corresponding to a heat
generation rate of about 2 to 20 kW/m3for decay periods of up to about ten
years after discharge of spent fuel from a reactor. From this range, the lower
value of about 2 kW/m3 is considered reasonable to distinguish HLW from other
radioactive waste classes, based on the levels of decay heat emitted by HLW
such as those from processing spent fuels.
2.4.1 ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS
A
number of additional important factors should be considered when addressing
specific types or properties of radioactive waste.
2.4.2 Waste containing long lived natural radionuclides
Many
countries must address the disposal of very large quantities of waste containing
long lived natural radionuclides. Such waste typically contains natural radionuclide
like uranium, thorium, and radium and is frequently generated from uranium/thorium
mining and milling or similar activities. It may also include waste from
decommissioning of facilities, where other isotopes may also be present. The
characteristics of these wastes are sufficiently different from other wastes
that they may require an individual regulatory approach.
Although
these wastes do contain long lived radionuclides, their concentrations are
generally sufficiently low that either they can be exempted or disposal options
similar to those for short lived waste may be considered, depending on safety
analyses.
2.4.3 Heat generation
Although
heat generation is a characteristic of high level radioactive waste, other
radioactive wastes may also generate heat, although at lower levels. Heat generations
dependent upon the type and content of radionuclides (half-life, decay energy, etc.).
Furthermore, the heat removal situation is highly important (thermal conductivity,
storage geometry, ventilation, etc.). Therefore, heat generation cannot be
defined by a single value. The relevance of heat generation can vary by several
orders of magnitude depending on the influencing parameters and the temperature
limitations. Management of decay heat should be considered in a repository if the
thermal power of waste packages reaches several W/m3. Especially in the case of
long lived waste, more restrictive values may apply.
2.5 Liquid
and gaseous waste
The
treatment of liquid waste (which may contain particulate solids) and gaseous
waste (which may contain aerosols) aims at separating the radionuclides from
the liquid or gaseous phase and concentrating them in a solid waste form. The
separation is pursued until the residual concentration or total amount of radionuclides
in the liquid or gaseous phase is below limits set by the regulatory body for
the discharge of liquid or gaseous waste from a nuclear facility as an
effluent. Treatment may include a storage period for radioactive decay.
Liquid
and gaseous radioactive waste exceeding discharge limits set by national
authorities should be conditioned for storage, transport and disposal. Only
following sound safety analysis should radioactive waste in liquid or gaseous form
be transported off the site or disposed of in terrestrial repositories in their
original forms. Storage for decay at the facility of their origin may be
considered as part of the conditioning process.
The
classification of liquid and gaseous radioactive waste may be based on the
different types of treatment that can be used, and on potential radiological, chemical
and biological hazards. When solidified or conditioned for disposal these
wastes fall under one of the solid radioactive waste classes.
3.
Hazard Measures for Nuclear Wastes
3.1 Exposures
from Direct Contact
The
spent fuel assemblies are placed, with remote handling, into cooling pools. They
eventually are to be transferred from the cooling pools into protective
canisters which are placed in heavy casks, again with remote handling. The canisters
and casks provide substantial shielding—essentially as much as one wants if a
price is paid in weight. Therefore, radiation exposure from close contact with
spent fuel assemblies is not a critical safety issue, assuming proper handling
during the operations that precede their placement in the casks.
The
high radiation levels from unshielded spent fuel provide important protection
against theft by people who do not have the elaborate equipment and facilities
required to handle the fuel assemblies. However, in considering the radiation
hazards from nuclear wastes, the usual focus is not on exposures of terrorists
or others from direct contact. It is on the possible exposure of the general
public many centuries hence, through the escape into the biosphere of radionuclides
from waste repositories.
3.2 Hazards
from Wastes in a Repository
The
ultimate measure of the hazards created by nuclear wastes is the dose or
spectrum of doses received by people who may ingest or inhale radionuclides that
escape from the repository. Calculating this dose requires as a first step the
evaluation of mechanisms by which the waste containers might be damaged, permitting
the escape of radionuclides. Then, for each radionuclide, it is necessary to
consider its amount in the repository as a function of time, the rate at which
it would escape from damaged containers, its subsequent movement from the
repository site to the biosphere, its pathways for entering the human body, and
the dose resulting from its ingestion or inhalation.
4.
DOCUMENTATION OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE
Waste
documentation has to contain all information which is required for repository
planning and for providing a sound technical and administrative basis for waste
acceptance at future repositories. It consists of
·
A waste type documentation which
comprehensively covers the general features of the set of waste packages
summarized under the heading of a "type" within a waste package type
specification, taking into account the results of any prototype testing and
issues from previous waste characterization programmes.
·
Individual waste package documentation
dedicated to real package-specific data, including a waste package datasheet
with the results of the quality control programme, a storage logbook and, if
applicable, package-specific results from the waste characterization
programmes.
The
waste package type specification is a technical document in which the waste
producer describes and specifies the following aspects for a set of similar
waste packages:
·
Manufacturing conditions (conditioning
procedures and plant)
·
Structure and properties of the package
and its components (nominal values, band-widths, guarantees)
·
Quality control programme
·
Datasheet specimen for single packages
5. Storage
and Disposal of Nuclear Wastes
5.1 Material
management and waste conditioning
There are (limited) possibilities of avoiding or at
least minimizing radioactive waste. During planning or construction of a
research facility, one should try to keep the amount of potentially irradiated
materials as low as possible and to use materials with a low tendency for
build-up of critical safety relevant nuclides (e.g. steels with low Ni and/or
Co impurities). The option of a free release of materials from controlled
zones. In addition the recycling (e.g. copper wires) or reuse (e.g. use of
activated concrete as shielding material in other facilities) within nuclear
installations reduces the volume of radioactive or conventional waste to be
disposed of.
The resulting radioactive waste has to be
conditioned. For waste from nuclear research facilities (mostly large
components), cementation in large containers is probably the most convenient
strategy. Materials can be mixed as long as the waste acceptance criteria are
met. (Large) components with voids can be used to incorporate small parts and
then be cemented as a unit into a disposal container. Waste volume reduction by
- Compression
- Melting
- Incineration
They should be considered as a possible
pre-treatment step.
5.2 Basic Steps and Activities in Radioactive Waste Management
Waste Generation occurs
during the operational period and during the decommissioning of nuclear
facilities. It can be in the form of solid, liquid or gaseous waste.
Pretreatment
is
the initial step that occurs just after generation. It consists of, for
example, collection, segregation, chemical adjustment and decontamination and
may include a period of interim storage. This step provides the best
opportunity to segregate waste streams, based on similar methods of future
management, and to isolate those wastes that are nonradioactive, or those
materials which can be recycled.
Treatment
involves
changing the characteristics of the waste. Basic treatment concepts are volume
reduction, radionuclide removal and change of composition. Typical treatment
operations include: incineration or compaction of dry solid waste or organic
liquid wastes (volume reduction); evaporation, filtration or ion exchange of
liquid waste (radionuclide removal); and precipitation or flocculation of
chemical species (change of composition).
Conditioning
involves
those operations that transform radioactive waste into a form suitable for
handling, transportation, storage and disposal. These operations may include
immobilization of radioactive waste, placing waste into containers and
providing additional packaging. Common immobilization methods include
solidification of LLW and ILW liquid radioactive waste, for example in cement,
and vitrification of HLW in a glass matrix. Immobilized waste may be placed in
steel drums or other engineered containers to create a waste package.
Storage
of
radioactive waste may take place between and within the basic radioactive waste
management steps. Storage may be used to facilitate the next step or to act as
a buffer between and within steps. Periods of storage may extend to many years
until the waste is removed from the storage facility for further processing and
disposal as applicable. Storage facilities may be co-located with a nuclear
power plant or a licensed disposal facility, or may be separate entities. The
intention of storage is to isolate the radioactive waste, provide environmental
protection and facilitate control.
Retrieval
involves
the recovery of waste packages from storage either for inspection purposes, for
subsequent disposal or further storage in new facilities. Storage facilities
may be designed such that the original emplacement equipment may be operated in
reverse in order to retrieve waste packages. Others may require the
installation of retrieval equipment at the appropriate time.
Disposal
consists
of the authorized emplacement of packages of radioactive waste in a disposal
facility, without the primary intention of retrieval and without a need
for any further actions to ensure future safety. Disposal may also comprise of
discharging radioactive waste (for example, liquid and gaseous effluent into
the environment).
5.3
There are a number of activities that
are carried out during the management of all types of waste. These are:
Minimization
of
waste is fundamental good practice in radioactive waste management. It should
be considered during the design of facilities, and applied during all of the
basic steps. Effective methods of minimizing the accumulation of radioactive
waste include the clearance of waste that is below regulatory control, and the
reuse or recycling of radioactive material.
Characterization
of
radioactive waste involves determining the physical, chemical and radiological
properties. It may be carried out in association with several of the basic
steps. It may be required for record keeping, acceptance of waste moving
between steps and also to determine the best method of managing waste.
Segregation
of
radioactive waste involves accumulating together those wastes that have similar
physical, chemical and radiological properties and that will be subject to
similar methods or options for future management. It also avoids mixing
together radioactive wastes that have different properties and different
methods of future management. It is most effectively carried out during the
early steps of radioactive waste management.
Transportation
of
radioactive waste may take place between and within the basic steps. The term transport
generally refers to moving radioactive waste between nuclear sites, whereas
transfer refers to moving radioactive waste within a nuclear site.
Figure
4. The Basic Steps of Radioactive Waste
Management
5.4
Radioactive Waste Minimization
Radioactive
waste is a product of many operations within the nuclear industry. Avoiding the
creation of radioactive waste in the first instance and, secondly, minimizing
the rate at which waste, which must be created, is produced is one of the
foremost principles of good radioactive waste management.
The
generation of radioactive waste shall be kept to the minimum practicable, in
terms of both its activity and volume, by appropriate design measures and
operating and decommissioning practices. This includes the selection and
control of materials, recycle and reuse of materials, and the implementation of
appropriate operating procedures. Emphasis should be placed on the segregation
of different types of waste and materials to reduce the volume of radioactive waste
and facilitate its management.
5.4.1 Waste minimization
Practice
In
general, measures to reduce radioactive waste production at source are more
effective than measures taken after the waste has been created. Waste
minimization is fundamental good practice, reduces hazards on site, reduces the
potential impact on the environment, and in many cases is cost effective. Waste
minimization includes the following practices (in some cases the practices
reduce the accumulation of waste rather than it’s creation):
·
Avoidance of the production of secondary
wastes;
·
Segregation of waste streams (by waste
category, physical and
Chemical properties);
·
Preventing spread of contamination;
·
Recycling and reusing material;
·
Waste clearance;
·
Decontamination;
·
Volume reduction;
·
Disposal.
Expects
the safety cases for all nuclear facilities to include a demonstration that the
rate of production and accumulation of waste has been reduced so far as is
reasonably practicable. This should include an optimization study of the
activity in liquid and gaseous routine discharges, solid waste arising,
occupational exposure and environmental impact.
5.4.2 Consideration during Design
Waste
minimization should be considered at the design stage of a new plant, and when
modifications are made to existing plant. The implications for waste generation
should be taken into account in:
·
process selection;
·
plant layout;
·
choice of components and materials; and
·
decontaminable construction materials.
Similarly,
good operating practices should be defined at the outset to limit the
generation of secondary wastes (for example, use of reusable protective
clothing and suitable packaging materials).
6.
Stages in Waste
Handling
The main stages in nuclear waste
handling are as follows:
·
Storage of spent fuel in cooling pools
at the reactors.
·
Dry storage of spent fuel at reactor
sites.
·
Reprocessing of spent fuel.
·
Interim storage of reprocessed waste or
spent fuel at centralized facilities.
·
Permanent disposal of spent fuel,
reprocessed waste, or residues of transmutation, by placement in repositories
or by other means.
·
Transportation of spent fuel or
reprocessed waste as it moves through the stages above.
6.1 Storage of Spent Fuel at Reactor Sites
Limitations of
Cooling Pools
Originally,
it was expected that the spent fuel from nuclear reactors would be held in
cooling pools at the reactor sites for a brief time and that reprocessing would
be carried out after about 150 days. Instead the fuel has remained at the
reactor sites, and some pools have held fuel for over 20 years. The capacity of
these pools is limited, and although no reactor has had its operation stopped
by a shortage of cooling pool space, individual reactors have faced a severe
squeeze. The capacity for
storage of spent fuel assemblies at the reactor site can be increased to a
modest extent by modifying the geometric arrangement of the assemblies in the
cooling pool. A much larger expansion can be achieved by using dry storage.
6.2 Dry Storage of Spent Fuel at Reactor Sites (in situ)
Dry
storage systems, the spent fuel rods are transferred to special casks when the
total activity and the heat output are reduced enough for air cooling to
suffice. This solves the problem
of limited cooling pool capacity and is an option that can be implemented
pending decisions on the establishment of centralized facilities. It also
defers the contentious issue of transportation of nuclear wastes. The dry
storage casks are cooled by natural convective airflow, without pumps. They
must be licensed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which by 2003 had
approved 15 different cask designs
A
diagram of the cask used at the Palisades facility is shown in Figure 5.
The
fuel assemblies are transferred underwater in the reactor cooling pool to a
steel canister (called a basket). The canister is then brought to a
decontamination area, where it is pumped dry, filled with helium, and sealed
with redundant welded lids. The sealed canister is placed in the storage cask,
which consists of an outer cylinder with a 29-in.-thick concrete wall and a
steel inner liner that is at least 1.5 in. thick. As shown in figure 5 and
figure 6.
The canister is cooled by natural air convection
in a gap between the canister and the cask liner. In its first years, on-site
storage often attracted significant legal and political challenges, although
the first facility, at the Surry reactor, was installed in 1986 without any
significant opposition. Legal efforts were made to stop on-site dry storage at
the Palisades reactor in 1993, but these failed in the Michigan courts.
However, in Minnesota, the state courts ruled that proposed dry cask storage at
the Prairie Island nuclear plant required legislative approval, which was
eventually granted in May 1994 under a plan that allowed a gradual installation
of storage casks, but under conditions that appear to point toward a long-term
phasing out of nuclear power in Minnesota
Figure
5: Dry storage cask
system used at the Palisades nuclear power plant. Top: canister (basket) for holding fuel assemblies;
bottom: storage cask for containing sealed canister.
Figure
6: Dry cask storage on a concrete pad
with cutaway schematic of a cask
An
extensive survey of the interim storage issue, in a joint report by groups from
Harvard University and Tokyo University, endorses dry cask storage in the
following terms:
Dry
storage technologies, especially dry casks, have been increasingly widely used
in recent years. The combination of simplicity, modularity, and low operational
costs and risks offered by dry cask storage systems make them highly attractive
for many storage applications. This report does not put forth dry cask storage
as the only acceptable option nor does it take a crisp position on the choice
between on-site and centralized storage.
6.3 Reprocessing
Reprocessing
is the technique of dissolving spent fuel rods and then removing the plutonium
and uranium elements. Nuclear plants use the extracted plutonium and uranium as
fuel and can continue reprocessing the spent fuel rods until the concentrations
of uranium and plutonium are too low to allow reprocessing to be cost
effective. The reprocessing method’s wastes are liquid and dangerous and
difficult for disposal. Reprocessing plants utilize vitrification to turn the
liquid wastes into solid waste. Vitrification is the process of dissolving the
liquid high-level waste in molten glass and allowing the mixture to harden into
a solid
Reprocessing
allows the recycling of spent fuel rods decreasing waste by 75%. The waste also
contains no plutonium which decreases the waste’s required storage time because
plutonium has a half-life of 24,000 years which is longer than the other
materials’ half-lives. Reprocessed waste decays to a background radiation level
within 2,000 years, while unreprocessed waste takes 100,000 years.
6.4 Drawbacks and Environmental Damage
There
are many drawbacks to both reprocessing and on-site storage which make them
unable to facilitate the permanent storage needed for nuclear waste.
6.4.1 On-site Storage Drawbacks
In
the United States there are 44,000 tons of spent uranium fuel rods. Nuclear
plants store all the high-level waste on-site. There are many risks to storing
the spent fuel on-site in cooling pools and steel and concrete casks. The
amount of spent fuel also increases the risks of on-site storage because the
cooling pools are full and the storage of new waste is in dry casks. The
Nuclear Regulatory Commission determined that spent fuel rods stored in dry
casks are safe for 100 years. Therefore, the cooling pools and the dry casks
are not permanent solutions because dry casks can safely store waste for 100
years and cooling pools do not have any more room for spent fuel storage.
Adding to the problem is that the United States is increasing the total spent
fuel by about 2,200 tons per year. Therefore, the government must find a
solution which will last for 100,000 years and safely store the waste
preventing environmental contamination. Also, on-site nuclear waste would
increase radioactive waste contamination in the event of a nuclear plant
meltdown. A meltdown could destroy the containment shelter allowing for more
radioactive waste to contaminate the surrounding area.
6.4.2 Reprocessing Drawbacks
Reprocessing
is also not a good solution because it has many drawbacks. The waste produced
during the reprocessing method is liquid and more difficult to handle than the
solid waste. Reprocessing plants must change the waste into a solid and then
find a suitable storage facility for the waste. Nuclear plants also must
transport the nuclear waste to reprocessing plants. For example, Japan
transports their nuclear waste across the ocean to Great Britain for
reprocessing. Transporting the waste increases the risk of environmental
contamination. Another drawback is that reprocessing isolates the plutonium
from the waste material. The weapons grade plutonium causes security concerns
because a terrorist group could use the plutonium to build a nuclear weapon. The
security concerns of reprocessing nuclear waste led the United States to
discontinue reprocessing in the 1970s. France and Britain reprocess their
high-level waste. Reprocessing reduces, but does not eliminate, the requirement
for the nuclear industry to store spent fuel securely to prevent the waste from
contaminating the environment
7.
Nuclear Waste
Transportation
7.1
Waste Transportation Plans
The
prospect of large amounts of spent fuel being transported from the reactor sites
to a centralized location—whether an interim facility or a permanent repository—has
led to a debate over the dangers that might result. The shipments, from many
parts of the country, would have to pass through numerous governmental
jurisdictions. Unless a public consensus develops that the dangers posed by
these shipments are small, political and legal challenges could complicate the
implementation of any transportation program.
The
safety of the shipments depends on the characteristics of the wastes and their
containers. The wastes are in solid form, mostly pellets of spent fuel
contained in assemblies of fuel rods. The
assemblies are to be placed into transportation casks at the reactor sites. The
casks are massive structures that are designed to provide adequate shielding to
keep the external radiation levels low and to be rugged enough to withstand
potential transportation accidents. Accidents are expected to be rare, but if
they occur, the cask, the fuel rod cladding, and the solid form of the fuel rod
are the defense against the release of radionuclides.
7.2
Transportation
System and Cask Design
The
shipment of the transportation casks is to be made by a combination of truck,
train, and barge. the
transportation plans in terms of two possible scenarios, characterized as mostly
rail and mostly truck. In the mostly rail case, some use is made of
trucks for reactor sites where rail transport is not readily available. In this
scenario.
The
truck casks are smaller and a truck-only system would require more shipments
than a mostly rail system. The
DOE estimates that the transfer of 63,000 tonnes of commercial spent fuel and
7000 tonnes of defenses wastes (the amount authorized for Yucca Mountain) will
require about 53,000 truck shipments (in the mostly truck case) These shipments
would be spread over 24 years (optimistically, from 2010 to 2033) at an average
rate of 2200 shipments per year. This means an average of six shipments per day
would converge on the repository site from different parts of the country.
The
physical arrangement for shipping is sketched in Figures 7 and 8. which present
“artists concepts” of the configuration for truck and rail shipments. For truck
shipments, a single cask would be placed on a trailer that is elongated to
reduce the radiation level in the driver’s cab. In train transport, a single
cask would be placed on a flatcar. The casks are designed to provide radiation
shielding to protect people in the vicinity of the casks, including both the
truck drivers and the general public. They must also protect the fuel
assemblies against damage in case of an accident. A number of alternative
designs have been under consideration, and until final decisions are made,
their expected features are described by “generic” designs. Table
3 gives dimensions for generic truck and rail casks.
The
fuel is surrounded by three concentric metallic protective layers: a stainless steel
liner, a lead or depleted uranium layer for gamma-ray shielding, and a
stainless-steel outer shell. In addition, a neutron shield surrounds the shell,
and it, in turn, is protected by a relatively thin metallic outer layer. Uranium
is chosen as a possible gamma-ray shield because of its high density (19 g/cm3)
and high atomic number. The casks have “impact limiters” at the front for
protection in case of collisions.
Fig.
7. Artist’s
conception of transportation cask and carrier for truck transport;
total
length = 18 m (56 ft).
Fig.
8. Artist’s conception of transportation casks and carrier for train transport;
total
length = 21 m (66 ft).
Table
3. Dimensions
of generic transportation casks (in inches).
Figure
9. A truck transporting three casks of transuranic waste to the Waste Isolation
Pilot Plant (WIPP) in New Mexico, USA
8. Deep
Geologic Disposal
8.1 Multiple Barriers in Geologic Disposal
The
handling of nuclear wastes is in the first instance the responsibility of the country
in which the wastes are produced. Although there have been suggestions for the
establishment of international repositories most countries are proceeding the
basis of using a site within its own borders. In all countries that are engaged
in active planning, the favored solution has been to place the wastes in deep
geologic repositories. Protection against the escape of radionuclides into the
biosphere is then provided by a number of barriers, with the overall set of
barriers commonly divided into the engineered
system and the natural
system.
The
waste package, auxiliary
components such as a shield or backfill, and the configuration of the
repository together constitute the engineered system. The waste package
consists of the solid waste (the spent fuel assemblies or the resolidified
products of reprocessing) and the surrounding protective containers. These are
usually concentric cylinders made of materials that are chosen because of their
ability to resist corrosion and prevent water from reaching the waste material.
In some designs, additional protection against water intrusion is provided by a
protective shield above the canister, and entry or escape of water may be
hindered by backfill surrounding the waste package. The engineered system
cannot be designed independently of the natural environment, because factors
such as the water flow rate, the water chemistry, and the heat conductivity of
the medium strongly influence the choice of waste package design and the
repository configuration.
The
natural system is the surrounding rock through which water would move to the repository,
and from the repository to the biosphere. It includes the rock out of which the
repository is excavated. A good repository site is one for which the location
and type of rock
(a) Prevent or limit the flow of water
into the repository,
(b) Provide geochemical conditions
favorable for a low rate of corrosion of the waste package and low solubility
of radionuclides in the event of entry of water,
(c) Slow the outward migration of water
to the biosphere,
(d) Retard the motion of major
radionuclides so that they move more slowly than the water, and
(e) Are at low risk of future disruption
by earthquake, volcano, erosion, or other natural phenomena.
Together, these attributes provide a series of
natural barriers.
Repositories
may be in rock in a saturated zone,
lying below the groundwater table, or in an unsaturated zone, lying above the water table. Except in
arid climates, the water table usually lies too close to the ground surface to
permit having a geologic repository in the unsaturated zone, and in almost all
countries the planned repositories are in the saturated zone.
In
the saturated zone, the gaps and pores in the rock are filled with water,
although the site may still be suitable if the movement of water through the
rock mass is at a slow rate. In the unsaturated zone, the pores hold less water
but seepage of rain water introduces some moisture into the rock, and the
environment of a repository in the unsaturated zone is unlikely to be
completely dry.
8.2 Alternative Host Rocks for a Geologic Repository
A
large number of different types of rocks have been considered for waste
repositories. There is no single overall “best” choice, as evidenced by the
different choices made by different countries. Among the physical factors that
go into the consideration of a particular rock formation are the extent to
which water entry would be inhibited, its retardation of the flow of any
escaped radionuclides, and its behavior when heated by the repository wastes.
Rocks that have been considered as candidates for repositories include the
following
·
Bedded
salt. Bedded rock salt
was the initial candidate of choice. The existence of a salt bed was taken as
evidence that there had been no water intrusion for many thousands of years.
Further, salt has high thermal conductivity, which would limit the temperature
rise of the wastes. Salt melts at relatively low temperatures, and the waste
would eventually be surrounded by a tight resolidified mass of salt. On the
negative side, salt brine is highly corrosive and may attack the canister.
·
Salt
domes. Under some
circumstances, the pressure on a thick bed of salt will cause some of the salt
(which, in general, has a lower density than the surrounding rock) to break
through the overlying material and rise upward to form a salt dome. One
advantage of salt domes over bedded salt is a generally lower water content.
The Gorleben site, a waste disposal site under consideration in Germany, is a
salt dome.
·
Granite.
Granite
and similar rocks (granitoids) are very abundant. They are stable and generally
homogenous, with low permeability to water movement. However, they are
susceptible to fractures, which could provide paths for relatively rapid water
flow. Granite is the choice in Sweden and Canada.
·
Basalt.
Basalt
is an alternative rock formation, although a National Research Council review
has suggested that “a major reason for considering basalt for repositories is
its abundance in federal land near Hanford, Washington and the Idaho National
Engineering Laboratory (INEL) and not its overall favorable characteristics”.
·
Tuff.
Tuff
is the residue of material blown out of exploding volcanoes. At high
temperatures, some of the material fuses to form “welded tuff,” a material of
low permeability. Tuff, both welded and unwelded, is the rock type at Yucca
Mountain. Tuff can be highly fractured, and a study of the fracture structure
is an important component of the Yucca Mountain waste repository site
characterization.
The
suitability of a particular site depends not only on the type of rock but also
on location-specific aspects, including the history of past human disturbance
of the region the thickness of the available rock layers, and the absence of
valuable mineral resources.
Figure 10: Conceptual Design of Yucca Mountain
Disposal Plan
Table
no. 4:
8.3 The Waste Package
8.3.1 Relation of the Waste Package to Its Environment
The
waste package—and for reprocessed wastes, the waste form—is selected to limit
corrosion of the canister and leaching of the waste. The rate of corrosion or
leaching of any particular material depends on the chemical composition of the
water attacking it, and, therefore, on the type of rock through which the water
has traveled. Therefore, the choice of waste packaging materials must be
tailored to the chosen site.
Fig.
11: Cross-sectional
illustration of proposed PWR waste package, together with drip shield (above)
and support structure (below).
Figure
12: Waste Package or waste container
8.3.2 Components of the Waste Package
The
waste package consists of the spent fuel or reprocessed waste plus the surrounding
protective container, which is typically in the form of one or more concentric
cylinders. The overall requirement is that the container provide protection
against physical damage (e.g., from falling rock in the drift) and resist
corrosion. Commonly, there is an inner cylinder, or canister, with metal panels
that are arranged in a honeycomb structure to hold the individual fuel
assemblies. The panels also
provide mechanical support, facilitate heat transfer to the container wall, and
absorb neutrons to prevent the development of criticality. The same functions
could be performed by filling the canister with a powder or sand. An outer
cylinder, sometimes called the over pack, was originally envisaged as the
heavier and physically stronger barrier.
Figure
13: Loading radioactive waste packages of LLW and ILW into disposal containers.
8.3.3 Placement of the Waste Packages
A
typical underground repository design is a large cavern, honeycombed with tunnels,
called “drifts.” In the early thinking about Yucca Mountain, for example, each
tunnel was to have a series of vertical boreholes for emplacing the waste
packages; a cylinder containing spent fuel assemblies or solid reprocessed waste
would be placed in each borehole and the top portion of the borehole refilled
and sealed. More recently, the Yucca Mountain planning has been based on larger
canisters, placed horizontally on the floor of the tunnel, sitting on rail
tracks. This simplifies their handling, provides flexibility in moving them,
and makes retrievability easier if desired in the future. These two
configurations are depicted schematically in Figure 13 and 14.
Figure
14. Placement of the Waste Packages in fuel spent fuel
In
some designs, there is no extensive further protection against contact with
water, other than the natural dryness of the environment plus the effects of
repository heating. Alternatively, the cavity around the package can be filled with
a backfill to impede water movement. A common choice is bentonite, a material
made largely of clays. Bentonite swells when water enters it, impeding the flow
of water toward or away from the waste containers. Further, it adsorbs many
radionuclides, reducing their migration to a rate even slower than that of the
water itself. However, bentonite may not be effective if subjected to high
temperatures, and thus it may be more suitable for the relatively cool
environment of the planned Swedish repository than for Yucca Mountain if plans
for a hotter environment are adopted. Materials known as buffers can
also be added to the backfill to condition the chemical composition of any
water moving through the backfill.
Fig.
15: Illustrative
sketch of alternative containers and emplacement geometries for deep geologic
disposal of spent fuel or reprocessed wastes. Left: thin-walled container in
vertical borehole; right: thick-walled container in horizontal drift. The backfill
in this illustration is coarse rock.
8.4 Variants of Geologic Disposal
In
addition to excavated caverns, which everywhere remain the adopted approach for
planning purposes, several other sorts of geologic site have been considered,
although none is an active contender at the moment:
8.4.1 Deep-borehole disposal.
The wastes would be
placed in holes at depths of several kilometers in crystalline rock, such as
granite. This option has not been
given a great deal of attention. For example drilling the numerous boreholes
probably entails higher costs than those for excavated caverns and the option
faces difficulties in sealing the boreholes and maintaining retrievability.
Suitable rock deposits are so common that the study even mentioned the
possibility of locating boreholes at or near reactor sites. This recommendation
by a prestigious group may foreshadow greater future consideration of
deep-borehole disposal.
8.4.2 Rock melt
High-level wastes in liquid form would be put
into an underground cavity where, at high concentrations and confined volumes,
they would melt the surrounding rock. Subsequent cooling and solidification, perhaps
after about 1000 years, would trap the wastes in a well-sealed environment. Of
course, the wastes would not be as well trapped at early times, while the
material is liquid. Further, it would be difficult if not impossible to retrieve
the wastes, even at times shortly after disposal.
8.4.3 Sub seabed Disposal
Deep-seabed
or
sub seabed disposal (SSD) provides a technically interesting alternative
to geologic disposal. At present, it is not a viable option, because SSD is
banned by an international agreement commonly known as the London Dumping
Convention. Nonetheless, it warrants consideration, because the Convention
could be modified if a consensus were to develop that SSD is practical and poses
no significant environmental threats.
8.4.3.1 Main Features of Sub
seabed Disposal
The
deep seabed, at places where the ocean is several thousand meters deep, has
been formed from the deposition of sediments over millions of years. The seabed
is in the form of a water-saturated clay layer, on the order of 50 m thick. Its
physical properties as a site for high-level waste burial were described in
favorable terms in a 1994 National Academy of Sciences study on the disposition
of plutonium from dismantled nuclear weapons:
The deep ocean floor in
vast mid-ocean areas is remarkably geologically stable; smooth, homogenous mud
has been slowly building up there for millions of years. The concept envisioned
for HLW[high-level wastes] was to embed it in containers perhaps 30 meters deep
in this abyssal
mud, several kilometers beneath the ocean surface. . .the mud itself
would be the primary barrier to release of the material into the ocean, because
the time required for diffusion of radionuclides through this mud would be very
long.
About
30% of the ocean floor (∼
108
) is composed of sediments of this sort,
and one goal of SSD studies is to identify specific regions that have been geologically
stable for long time periods, in the range of
years or more. An individual repository might
be
in area. The canisters containing nuclear
wastes could be emplaced in this sediment either by free fall through the
ocean, by forcible injection, or in predrilled holes. The canisters might be
individually emplaced, with one canister per penetration of the ocean floor or
stacked, with several canisters apiece in holes drilled deep into the seabed.
The holes would be sealed either mechanically or by natural processes in the
sediment. Once the canisters are in place and buried, they are in a uniform
environment over wide regions, so that the durability of the canisters and the
rate of migration of radionuclides through the clay will not vary greatly from
place to place.
8.4.4 High-Level Nuclear Waste in Space
The current cost to launch an object into orbit
around the earth is about $20,000 per kilogram. Beamed energy technology (BEP)
based on laser-powered propulsion of objects into space may considerably lower
the cost. Figure 5 is a model that shows the very small size of the BEP launch
container. If BEP is successful, it could send waste into high orbit for about
$200 per kilogram. However, BEP is at least 15 to 25 years from being a real
alternative because the highest flight using BEP technology is currently less
than a few hundred meters. Moreover, a conservative estimate of the cost of
developing BEP technology is $10 billion. Therefore, the adoption of BEP
technology is unlikely. Nevertheless, BEP would solve the problem of nuclear
waste storage and disposal because BEP could send nuclear waste out of our
atmosphere into orbit.
8.4.4.1 Nuclear
Waste in Space
BEP
represents a possible future solution to the nuclear waste storage problem, but
it will be a long time before anyone can say whether it is effective. It
promises to be a clean technology—the only trash that is left in space is the
small capsule containing the nuclear waste, and there is no potential for
explosions in the atmosphere. BEP would require tremendous resources and a lot
of time to develop, but if the technology can do what scientists predict, it
represents the easiest and cheapest of the solutions to the nuclear waste
problem. Nevertheless, BEP ought to be dismissed from consideration for now
because it is so great a leap in technology. It is not possible to say with
certainty that it would ever be possible to send our waste into space in this
way. As a result, BEP is not a factor in the ethical problem humanity faces,
because that problem is occurring right now and cannot wait such a long time
for an unproven technology.
9. Safety
Relevant Waste Properties And Acceptance Criteria
When
discussing the safety relevant waste properties, it is convenient to
distinguish between the operational phase and the post-closure phase. The
operational phase of a geological repository is, in principle, comparable to
the operation of a storage facility. The most important safety relevant
processes and the safety-determining factors for the operational phase of a
repository are summarized in Table 5.
Groundwater
flow is the most important pathway for any potential radionuclide releases in
the post-closure phase. For the analyses of this release scenario it is
convenient to divide the system into three components: the near field, the
geosphere and the biosphere. The near field (consisting of the disposal areas
with the wastes and the engineered barriers and a few meters of directly
surrounding host rock) ensures that only very small release rates will occur
because of the very low water flow rates and retention by geochemical
phenomena. Transport through the near field and the geosphere does take such a
long time that the majority of radionuclides decays before they can reach the
biosphere. The long transport times are again mainly due to the small water
flow rates and the geochemical retention processes.
Based
on these considerations for both the operational and post-closure phase
quantitative and qualitative criteria were developed for the preliminary waste
acceptance criteria. Key criteria are summarized in Table 6.
Table 5: Safety relevant processes and factors
for the operational phase of a repository
|
Process |
IMPORTANT FACTORS |
|
Waste package |
Repository |
||
Normal
operation
|
Direct
radiation
|
Nuclide
inventory
Shielding by
package
Shielding
by waste matrix
Number
of packages
|
Shielding,
operational procedures, remote handling, etc.
|
Release of
volatile nuclides
|
Nuclide
inventory (average)
Gas tightness
of package
Release of
volatile nuclides from waste matrix
Number of
packages
|
Ventilation
Backfilling
of disposal areas
|
|
Incidents
& accidents
|
Release of
airborne nuclides due to mechanical impact
|
Nuclide
inventory (maximum)
Dispersability
of waste matrix
Mechanical
protection by package
|
Operational
procedures, handling equipment, transport container, disposal container.
Remote
handling
Ventilation
|
Release of
airborne nuclides due to thermal impact
|
Nuclide
inventory (maximum)
Thermal
stability of waste matrix
Thermal
protection by package
|
Operational
procedures, handling equipment, transport container, disposal container
Remote
handling
Ventilation
|
Table 6: Key criteria in preliminary waste acceptance
criteria
10.
Passive Safety
in the Storage of Radioactive Materials and Radioactive Waste
Radioactive
materials and radioactive waste should be stored according to the principles of
passive safety. The more hazardous the waste (for example, HLW) and the more
mobile its form, the greater the safety benefit from passively safe storage and
the sooner this should be achieved. Only when this is not reasonably
practicable, should potentially mobile wastes be accumulated in a raw state for
significant periods.
Passive
safety requires the radioactive wastes and materials to be immobilized in a
form that is physically and chemically stable and stored in a manner which
minimizes the need for control and safety systems, maintenance, monitoring and
human intervention. The wastes and materials should be stored in discrete
packages which are resistant to degradation and hazards and which can be
inspected and retrieved for final disposal. There is need to ensure that waste
packages remain in a safe condition for a period of at least 150 years. The
passive safe storage of radioactive materials and radioactive waste has
potential long term safety benefits which clearly help to achieve this
requirement.
10.1 The Achievement of Passive Safety
Passive
safe storage of radioactive materials and radioactive waste is most
appropriately achieved by providing multiple physical barriers to the release
of radioactivity to the environment. The physical barriers include the form of
the waste or material itself, the material used for encapsulation, the waste
container and the storage building or structure, each of which should be
designed to provide effective containment and prevent leakage.
In
its strictest sense, passive safety requires that safety is assured without
dependence on active systems, maintenance, monitoring or human intervention.
However, with respect to the long term storage of radioactive waste, it may be
necessary or advantageous for active systems to be in place. In such cases, the
systems should be designed for minimum maintenance and, in the event of
failure, immediate repair/replacement should not be necessary in order to
ensure continuing safety of the storage facility and its contents.
10.2
Form of the Radioactive Material and/or
Radioactive Waste
The
primary consideration is to ensure that the radioactive material or radioactive
waste is immobile and is contained in order to minimize the potential for
dispersal. The radioactive material or waste should therefore be in a form
which is physically and chemically stable and should also be resistant to any
significant deterioration over the storage period.
Certain
raw radioactive wastes may be in a form for which the radioactivity is already
immobile and therefore meet the requirements for passive safety without the
need for processing. Such cases will require to be demonstrated, but examples
could include robust metallic components.
In
many cases, the raw radioactive material or radioactive waste will require
conditioning to place it into a passively safe form to immobilize the
radioactivity. Typical waste forms that fall into this category are gases,
liquids, wet solids, slurries, sludges, powders, particulate material, bulk
material and radioactive materials including spent fuel. The conditioning
processes that are typically used for immobilization of liquids and solids are
encapsulation in cement or vitrification.
Other
raw radioactive wastes may be in a form for which some intermediate processing
may be required prior to conversion into a passive safe form. For example,
highly reactive or corrosive substances should be neutralised or made less
reactive by chemical processes. In the few cases where a raw radioactive waste
is not suitable for processing, then these wastes should be identified and an
acceptable alternative strategy for their future management developed.
The
particular properties that can be expected to be met by a passively safe form
of radioactive waste or radioactive material are:
·
Stored potential energy should, as far
as possible, have been removed from the system. This can arise from, for
example, the effects of gravity, chemical energy, water pressure, internal
pressure and Wigner energy (graphite).
·
The form of the material or waste should
have low chemical reactivity, for example, low solubility, low flammability,
not be explosive and not need inerting.
·
Where the waste or material is known to
generate gases, the packaging should include provision for venting.
·
The form of the material or waste should
be resistant to degradation over the period of storage. Potential mechanisms
include corrosion, action of water and microbiological action.
·
The form of the material or waste should
not require cooling other than by natural circulation.
10.3 The
Waste Container and Encapsulation Material
In
order to contribute to passive safety the container should have attributes
similar to those already identified for the form of the material or waste. It
should be resistant to degradation over the period of storage and should be
resistant to the range of foreseeable internal or external hazards to an extent
that neither the containment function nor the ability of the container to be
handled safely are significantly impaired.
In
general, the waste package (i.e. the waste form, the encapsulation material and
the container) should be designed to be suitable for long term storage,
transport and potential final disposal of the waste. This will minimize the
amount of reworking prior to disposal.
Waste
packages should be uniquely identifiable via appropriate labeling. The method
of labeling should be designed to ensure identification over the expected
period and conditions of passive safe storage. Before being placed in storage,
waste packages should have been monitored and cleared for the presence of
surface contamination which could otherwise initiate or accelerate corrosion of
the package. Suitable arrangements should be available for dealing with any
surface contamination that is found.
10.4 Storage Building or Structure
The
storage building or structure is the final physical barrier to the release of
radioactivity to the environment. It is noted however, that in aiming to
achieve passive safety the most significant barriers are first and foremost the
waste form itself, and secondly the waste container. In some cases, the role of
the storage building or structure may be limited to providing environmental
protection, radiation shielding and presenting a secure boundary against
unauthorized intrusion or interference and entry of wildlife.
It
should demonstrate that the design of the storage building or structure is fit
for purpose, taking account of the expected time required for passive safe
storage and the hazards posed by the stored wastes i.e. the design should be
proportionate to the defined purpose of the building and to the risks.In some
cases, a building may be designed for a shorter life with the intention of
periodic refurbishment. In these cases, justification should be provided that
the waste can be stored safely while the refurbishment is carried out.
The
building should be designed to be resistant to the range of foreseeable
internal and external hazards. The storage building will need to provide
sufficient protection to the stored wastes so as to optimize the life of the
packages and to facilitate safe transfer to the final disposal facility (or to
a further storage facility) at the appropriate time. This may necessitate
control and monitoring of the environment of the storage building (temperature,
relative humidity and constituents of the atmosphere) and also of the surface
temperature of the waste packages in order to minimize corrosion rates. This
may be particularly important on near coastal sites where chloride levels in
the atmosphere are relatively high. Such environmental control cannot be
achieved by purely passive means and it may be necessary to adopt a forced
ventilation system with control of relative humidity and a filtered inlet to
remove atmospheric contaminants such as salts.
Monitoring
systems and alarms will need to be provided to detect off-normal conditions
such as off-normal temperature and relative humidity in the atmosphere of the
facility, buildup of flammable gases, water ingress, fires and unauthorized
intrusion. A radiation monitoring system would provide the ability to detect
radioactivity in liquid or gaseous forms in the event of damaged/deteriorated
packages. Groundwater should also be routinely monitored. Wherever possible,
the panels and electronics associated with the monitoring system should be
situated in a safe area of the building or externally.
The
design of the building should facilitate the retrieval of all waste packages
either for inspection, possible remedial treatment, further storage elsewhere
or for disposal at the end of the period of passive safe storage or at an
earlier time should radioactive waste management strategies change. Waste
handling equipment may not be continuously available, but should be capable of
being returned to service when needed and should be maintainable within a safe
area either inside or external to the building. Depending on the radiation
levels associated with the waste packages, remote or manual handling techniques
will be necessary.
One
of the foreseeable mechanisms for the mobilization of radioactivity in waste is
the ingress and action of water in a store. Potential sources of water ingress
are groundwater, rainwater, flooding and condensation. An effective means of
reducing potential water ingress is to situate the storage building above
ground level. If a building is below ground level then it is best situated
above the local water table. In general, it can be expected that the design of
a storage building will include features to monitor for water ingress and the
means to remove the water. These features could involve a sloping floor,
collection sump with level alarm and safe facilities to pump out water and
monitor for radioactivity prior to authorized disposal.
The
need for human involvement to ensure safety should be minimized. Ideally, no
continuous human presence or supervision should be required. Human involvement
should be limited to confirmatory surveillance, inspections and responding to
incidents on a reasonable timescale.
10.5 Hazards
The
multiple physical barriers to the release of radioactivity from the waste
should provide resistance to dispersal as a result of a range of foreseeable
external and internal hazards. Any hazards, which could cause deterioration of
the waste form, container or building over the storage period, should be taken
into account including, for example, corrosion, water or microbiological
action. For external hazards, such as weather and flooding, account should be
taken of long term trends such as rising sea level or climatic change. The
waste itself may be the source of hazards, in that it may have the potential
for criticality or radio lytic gas generation.
10.6 Records
The interim storage of radioactive waste in a
passive safe form may last for a period of more than 150 years before the
disposal facility is closed. Comprehensive records need to be assembled as part
of the storage arrangements. They need to be securely retained and to be
accessible when required.
10.7 Radiation
Shielding
Adequate shielding of operators and the public
against the radiation hazard from the radioactivity in the waste should be
provided by a combination of the waste form, the waste container and the
storage building or structure.
10.8 Radioactive
Discharges
If the long term storage of radioactive waste will
involve the discharge of radioactivity to the environment, for example, gaseous
discharges may occur via ventilation systems and liquid discharges may occur
from systems designed to maintain dry conditions in the store. Provision should
be made for mitigating the release of radioactivity from the facility in the
event of off-normal conditions, for example, by filtration or isolation.
Table 7: General Principles for Passive Safety
Principle
The radioactivity
should be immobile
The waste form and its
container should be physically and chemically stable Energy should be removed
from the waste form
A multi barrier
approach should be adopted in ensuring containment
The waste form and its
container should be resistant to degradation
Storage environment
should optimize waste package life
The need for active
safety systems to ensure safety should be minimized
The need for monitoring
and maintenance to ensure safety should be minimized
The need for human
intervention to ensure safety should be minimized
The storage building
should be resistant to foreseeable hazards
Access should be
provided for response to incidents
There should be no need
for prompt remedial action
The waste packages
should be inspect able
The waste packages
should be retrievable for inspection or reworking
The lifetime of the
storage building should be appropriate for storage period prior to disposal
The storage facility
should enable retrieval of wastes for final disposal (or restoring)
The
waste package should be acceptable for final disposal
11.
Inspection of
Accumulated and Stored Radioactive Materials and Radioactive Waste
Radioactive
materials and radioactive waste are accumulated during the operating and
decommissioning phases in the lifecycle of a nuclear facility. For those
radioactive wastes for which there is no current disposal route, licensees will
need to plan for long periods of storage. for radioactive waste and material
being placed in storage now, an overall period of containment of at least 150
years should be assumed
The
fundamental objective of inspecting accumulated and stored waste is to confirm
that the waste packages and facilities are, and will remain, in an acceptable
condition for continuing safe storage, retrieval, conditioning and final
disposal.
In
defining their inspection regimes, licensees should develop acceptance criteria
against which the condition of the waste is to be assessed. They should justify
the method of inspection (which could involve visual, nondestructive or
destructive techniques) and the frequency of inspections. Where the inspection
regimes are based on predicted rates of degradation, inspections should also be
undertaken at appropriate time intervals to confirm that the waste is not
deteriorating to an unexpected degree.
11.1
Inspection
of Accumulations of Raw Radioactive Waste
At
nuclear facilities some radioactive wastes are accumulated in their raw form,
with the intention of retrieving them for treatment and packaging, either after
the plant has shutdown, or when sufficient waste has been accumulated to make a
campaign cost-effective. Typical examples of such waste forms include spent
ion-exchange resins and sludges which are accumulated in tanks, awaiting
retrieval and encapsulation in cement in steel drums.
There
are a number of processes that can change the physical and chemical form of the
raw radioactive waste during accumulation. For example, the agglomeration and
consolidation of ion-exchange resins and sludges stored under water in tanks
can adversely affect the ability to retrieve them by hydraulic means.
Similarly, the corrosion of metallic solid radioactive wastes can adversely
affect their retrieval by mechanical means. An important aim of inspections is
to confirm that the rate of degradation of the waste will not impact on the
ability to retrieve and process the waste in the future as planned. This will normally
be achieved through direct sampling and analysis of the accumulated waste to
verify its condition.
11.2 Inspection during Passive Safe
Storage of Radioactive Waste
Radioactive
wastes for which there is no current disposal route should be processed for
long term passive safe storage. Although one of the aims of passive safety is
to minimize the need for surveillance and inspection to ensure safety, it is
expected that periodic inspections will be carried out to confirm that the
condition of the waste and its storage are not deteriorating adversely, and to
confirm its continuing acceptability for safe storage, and ultimately
retrieval, transport and disposal. Inspection will not be restricted to the
waste packages but will cover the storage facilities and buildings, and the
associated safety arrangements.
The
design of storage facilities to take account of the needs for inspection,
retrieval and transfer. All the radioactive waste accumulated or in storage to
be routinely inspect able. Where only a fraction of the waste is to be
inspected.
12.
Radioactive Waste In Hospitals/Nuclear Medical Centers
The radioactive waste at
hospitals/nuclear medical centers mainly comprises of
low level
(i)
solid
(ii)
liquid
and
(iii) gaseous waste .
Solid Waste: Solid waste mainly consists of used Molybdenum‑Technetium
generators. empty vials, swabs, syringes, gloves, laboratory clothing, bench
covers, absorbents etc.
Liquid Waste: Liquid waste includes washing from active labs., and excreta
of patients injected/ingested with radiopharmaceuticals. Biological waste such
as excreta or macerated material is regarded as liquid waste.
Gaseous Waste: Gaseous waste generally includes working with, tritium and
tritiated water, iodine and xenon‑133.
13.
Management Of Radioactive Waste In
Hospitals/Nuclear Medical Centers
There are two principal ways to deal with the radioactive waste. In the
first method, waste containing radioactive material is stored under controlled conditions until
it has decayed to background level so that disposal can be carried out. In
the second method, the activities are disposed of to the environment in such
a way that natural processes transfer it back to man only in such amounts that, in combination with other sources of
radiation, the resulting
radiation doses are negligible.
13.1 Management
of Solid waste
13.1.1
Collection:
The collection of radioactive waste
requires distribution of suitable containers (strong bins) throughout the
working area to receive discarded radioactive material. Each
container should be
lined with heavy gauge plastic bag. The plastic bag should be marked with the
name of radionuclide and date. The container should be brightly colored (e.g.
yellow) with the radiation symbol clearly displayed so as to distinguish it
from bins of inactive waste. Separate container should be used for each
radionuclide at the point of origin. However, different radionucides having
almost same half-life can be collected in one container (bin). Proper shielding
should be provided for the containers to keep the radiation level within limits.
13.1.2 Storage: The storage for decay is particularly important for
radioactive waste resulting from medical/research uses of radionuclides.
Many of the radionuclides used are of small activities and short lived. The radioactive waste should be stored for
decay purposes until the activity decays to the background level and can be
considered inactive for final disposal as normal waste. The
storage for decay is suitable for wastes containing
radionuclides with
half-lives of less than or equal to 100 days.
Keeping in view the working
practices in our country, the following recommendations are made for storage of
radioactive waste for decay purposes:
i.
Tc-99m should be stored for three months
ii.
I-131,
Tl-201, Ga-67 and Mo-99 (Tc-Generators)
should be stored for six months
iii.
In
general, the radionuclides having half-lives up to 3 days should be stored for three months and
radionuclides having half-lives up to 10 days should be stored for six months
iv.
Radionuclides
not covered in i-iii should be stored for at least 10 half-lives as specified
above
13.1.3 Disposal: After ensuring
that the radioactive waste has completed
its decay period, the radioactive waste can be disposed of as
normal waste after monitoring its residual activity. All the radiation
symbols, if any, should be removed from
the radioactive waste packages (plastic bags) before disposal as normal waste.
The waste disposal record should be properly maintained.
13.2 Management of Liquid Waste
The liquid waste should be
collected/stored in double stage delay tanks and discharged into the
sewerage system when the activity approaches
background level. Alternatively, all the liquid waste (active & non-active)
should be collected in a large dilution
tank and discharged to the sewerage system. Samples of liquid waste
should be taken and analyzed before its release into the normal sewerage. In
case of small laboratories dealing with RIA facility or research activities,
the liquid waste should be collected in polythene bottles and disposed
of in the normal sewerage after proper
analysis. Before discharge; it should be ensured that all radioactive materials
released into the sewer system are completely soluble and dispersible in water.
Liquid, if it contains suspended solids or sediments, may need to be filtered
prior to discharge. Non‑aqueous wastes which are immiscible with water should
be completely excluded and stored
separately. Excreta from patients and samples such as urine and blood
from patients who have received radioactive compounds should also be stored in
the above mentioned tanks and discharged to normal sewerage accordingly. A
complete and up‑to‑date record should be maintained of all the discharges.
The liquid waste generated due to
the application of H-3 and C-14 or other long-lived radionuclides should not be
disposed of into the normal sewerage system. This waste should be stored
separately and sent to Pakistan Institute of Science and Technology (PINSTECH),
Islamabad or
Karachi Nuclear Power Plant (KANUPP) for proper disposal.
13.3 Management
of Gaseous Waste
Particular care should be taken for
the management of gaseous waste. The main problem of gaseous waste is the
release of activity to the environment. Appropriate filter should be used to trap the airborne
radioactivity in the exhaust systems of the fume hood/labs. The contaminated filters should be treated as
solid radioactive waste.
GLOSSARY
activity.
Of an amount of a radioactive nuclide in a
particular energy state at a given
time, the quotient of dN by dt, where dN
is the expectation value of the number
of spontaneous nuclear transitions from that energy
state in the time interval dt:
The unit is
The special name for the unit of activity is
becquerel (Bq): 1 Bq =1
(Although becquerel is a synonym for reciprocal second,
it is to be used only
as a unit for activity of a radionuclide.)
In practice, the former special unit curie (Ci) is
still sometimes used:
1 Ci = 3.7x
(exactly).
conditioning.
Those
operations that produce a waste package suitable for handling, transportation,
storage and/or disposal. Conditioning may include the conversion of the radioactive
waste to a solid waste form, enclosure of the radioactive waste in containers,
and, if necessary, providing an overpack.
contamination.
The
presence of radioactive substances in or on a material or in the human body or
other place where they are undesirable or could be harmful.
disposal.
The
emplacement of waste in an approved, specified facility (e.g. near surface or
geological repository) without the intention of retrieval. Disposal also covers
the approved direct discharge of effluents (e.g. liquid and gaseous wastes)
into the environment, with subsequent dispersion.
disposal,
geological. Isolation of waste, using a system of
engineered and natural barriers at a depth up to several hundred metres in a
geologically stable formation. Typical plans call for disposal of long lived
and high level wastes in geological formations.
disposal,
near surface. Disposal of waste, with or without
engineered barriers, on or below the ground surface where the final protective
covering is of the order of a few metres thick, or in caverns a few tens of
metres below the Earth's surface. Typically, short lived, low and intermediate
level wastes are disposed of in this manner. This term replaces 'shallow
land/ground disposal'.
fuel,
spent (used). Irradiated fuel not intended for further
use in reactors.
fuel
cycle (nuclear). Processes connected with nuclear power
generation, including the mining and milling of fissile materials, enrichment,
fabrication, utilization and storage of nuclear fuel, optional reprocessing of
spent fuel, and processing and disposal of resulting radioactive wastes.
radioactivity.
Property
of certain nuclides to undergo spontaneous disintegration in which energy is
liberated, generally resulting in the formation of new nuclides. The process is
accompanied by the emission of one or more types of radiation, such as alpha
particles, beta particles and gamma rays.
radionuclide.
A
nucleus (of an atom) that possesses properties of spontaneous disintegration
(radioactivity). Nuclei are distinguished by their mass and atomic number.
repository.
A
nuclear facility where radioactive waste is emplaced for disposal. Future
retrieval of waste from the repository is not intended.
reprocessing.
Recovery
of fissile and fertile material for further use from spent fuel by chemical
separation of uranium and plutonium from other transuranic elements and fission
products. Selected fission products may also be recovered. This operation also
results in the separation of wastes.
segregation.
An activity where waste or materials (radioactive and exempt) are separated or
are kept separate according to radiological, chemical and/or physical
properties which will facilitate waste handling and/or processing. It may be
possible to segregate radioactive from exempt material and thus reduce the
waste volume.
solidification.
Immobilization
of gaseous, liquid or liquid-like materials by conversion into a solid waste
form, usually with the intent of producing a physically stable material that is
easier to handle and less dispersable. Calcination, drying, cementation,
bituminization and vitrification are some of the typical ways of solidifying
liquid radioactive waste.
storage
(interim). The placement of waste in a nuclear
facility where isolation, environmental protection and human control (e.g.
monitoring) are provided and with the intent that the waste will be retrieved
for exemption or processing and/or disposal at a later time. transportation.
Operations and conditions associated with and involved in the movement of
radioactive material by any mode, on land, water or in the air.The terms
'transport' and 'shipping' are also used.
vitrification.
The
process of incorporating materials into a glass or glass-like form. Vitrification
is commonly applied to the solidification of liquid high level waste from
the reprocessing of spent fuel.
waste,
heat generating. Waste which is sufficiently radioactive
that the energy of its decay significantly increases its temperature and the
temperature of its surroundings. For example, spent fuel and vitrified high
level waste are heat generating, and thus require cooling for several years.
waste,
high level (HLW). (1) The radioactive liquid containing
most of the fission products and actinides originally present in spent fuel and
forming the residue from the first solvent extraction cycle in reprocessing and
some of the associated waste streams.
waste,
long lived. Radioactive waste containing long lived
radionuclides having sufficient radiotoxicity in quantities and/or
concentrations requiring long term isolation from the biosphere. The term 'long
lived radionuclide' usually refers to half-lives greater than 30 years.
waste,
low and intermediate level. Radioactive wastes in
which the concentration of or quantity of radionuclides is above clearance
levels established by the regulatory body, but with a radionuclide content and
thermal power below those of high level waste. Low and intermediate level waste
is often separated into short lived and long lived wastes. Short lived waste
may be disposed of in near surface disposal facilities. Plans call for the
disposal of long lived waste in geological repositories.
waste,
short lived. Radioactive waste which will decay to a
level which is considered to be insignificant, from a radiological viewpoint,
in a time period during which institutional control can be expected to last.
Radionuclides in short lived waste will generally have half-lives shorter than
30 years.