The management of radioactive wasteA description of ten countries

Rolf Lidskog & Ann-Catrin Andersson

7

Building confidence in the long-term safety of deep geological disposal is akey issue for the nuclear waste management community. It involves nurturingconfidence in long-term safety measures on the part not only of technicalspecialists and the scientific community, but also of political decision-makersand the general public. Typically, repository development proceeds in stages,and flexibility must be built into the development process at each stage so asto allow for both new and better understanding and the demands of society atlarge in terms of reviewing the process. Confidence in long-term safety thusrequires communication with a wide audience on a variety of issues involvedin the stepwise implementation process.

For several years now, international organisations such as the NEA (theNuclear Energy Agency of the OECD), the IAEA (International AtomicEnergy Agency) and Euratom have been responsible for managing interna-tional problems relating to radioactive waste management.

EDRAM, the International Association for Environmentally Safe Disposal ofRadioactive Materials, was created a few years ago with a view to promotingnational programmes and co-ordinating the knowledge and experience gainedfrom them. The twelve member organisations from eleven countries areONDRAF/NIRAS (Belgium), Ontario Power Generation (Canada), POSIVAOY (Finland), ANDRA (France), BfS and DBE (Germany), NUMO (Japan),ENRESA (Spain), SKB (Sweden), NAGRA (Switzerland), Nirex (UnitedKingdom) and DOE-OCRWM (United States of America).

Professor Rolf Lidskog and BA Ann-Catrin Andersson at rebro Universityin Sweden have prepared this report at the request of an EDRAM WorkGroup. The report provides a description of how the responsible authorities/companies in ten EDRAM countries handle the management of radioactivewaste, including technical, economic and socio-political aspects (NUMO wasnot a member of EDRAM when work on the report first started, and Japan istherefore not represented in the report). The report also examines the flexiblestepwise approach and the issue of public involvement in decision-making.

The report describes the development and situation in each country up to theend of 2001, or later if noted as such in the country report.

It should be emphasised that the evaluations, viewpoints and conclusionspresented in this report are those of the authors and that they do notnecessarily coincide with those of the EDRAM member organisations.

8

5

Contents

1 Introduction 91.1 Radwaste a national problem with international dimensions 91.2 A flexible stepwise approach to radwaste management 10

1.2.1 The study: purpose, method and material 111.3 Concluding remarks 12

1.3.1 Democratic decision-making 131.3.2 Public participation 131.3.3 Public confidence and social acceptability 131.3.4 Conclusion 14

2 Nuclear waste management in Belgium Belgian Agencyfor Radioactive Waste and Enriched Fissile Materials(ONDRAF/NIRAS) 15

2.1 Introduction 152.2 Technical aspects 16

2.2.1 Present management methods 162.2.2 Research and development for disposal projects 182.2.3 Siting process 202.2.4 Safety evaluations, safety demonstration and licensing 20

2.3 Economic aspects 222.3.1 Financial issues 222.3.2 Time aspects for delays or unexpected events 23

2.4 Socio-political aspects 24

3 Nuclear waste management in Canada OntarioPower Generation 27

3.1 Introduction 273.2 Technical aspects 28

3.2.1 Present management methods 283.2.2 Research and development 293.2.3 The siting process for radioactive waste facilities 303.2.4 Safety and licensing 30

3.3 Economical aspects 313.4 Socio-political aspects 32

3.4.1 The role of politicians and public opinion 323.4.2 Decision-making process 323.4.3 Public confidence 323.4.4 Information and communication 33

6

4 Nuclear waste management in Finland Posiva Oy 354.1 Introduction 354.2 Technical aspects 35

4.2.1 Present management methods 354.2.2 Research and development 364.2.3 The siting process for deep repository 364.2.4 Safety and licensing 37

4.3 Economical aspects 374.3.1 Financial issues 37

4.4 Sociopolitical aspects 374.4.1 The role of politicians and public opinion 37

5 Nuclear waste management in France Agence nationalepour la gestion des dchets radioactifs (ANDRA) 39

5.1 Introduction 395.2 Technical aspects 40

5.2.1 Present management methods 405.2.2 Research and development 425.2.3 The siting process 445.2.4 Safety and licensing 46

5.3 Economical aspects 465.3.1 Financial issues 46

5.4 Sociopolitical aspects 465.4.1 The role of politicians and public opinion 46

6 Nuclear waste management in Germany BfS (Bundesamtfr Strahlenschutz) and DBE (Deutsche Gesellschaft zumBau und Betrieb von Endlagern fr Abfallstoffe GmbH) 49

6.1 Introduction 496.2 Technical process 51

6.2.1 Present method 516.2.2 Research and development 546.2.3 The repository siting process 546.2.4 Safety and licensing 55

6.3 Economical implications 576.3.1 Financial issues 57

6.4 Sociopolitical aspects 576.4.1 The role of politicians and public opinion 57

7 Nuclear waste management in Spain Empresa Nacionalde Residuos Radiactivos (ENRESA) 59

7.1 Introduction 597.2 Technical aspects 60

7.2.1 Present management methods 607.2.2 Research and development 627.2.3 The siting process of radioactive waste 637.2.4 Safety and licensing 63

7.3 Economical aspects 637.3.1 Financial issues 63

7

7.4 Socio-political aspects 647.4.1 The role of politicians and public opinion 647.4.2 Information and communication 65

8 Nuclear waste management in Sweden SvenskKrnbrnslehantering AB (SKB) 67

8.1 Introduction 678.2 Technical aspects 68

8.2.1 Current management methods 688.2.2 Research and development 688.2.3 The siting process for radioactive waste 708.2.4 Safety and licensing 718.2.5 Stepwise implementation of nuclear waste management 72

8.3 Economic aspects 738.3.1 Financial issues 73

8.4 Socio-political aspects 748.4.1 The role of politicians and public opinion 748.4.2 Decision-making process and public confidence 748.4.3 Public participation 758.4.4 Future implications 76

8.5 Addendum 76

9 Nuclear waste management in Switzerland The NationalCooperative for the Disposal of Radioactive Waste (NAGRA) 77

9.1 Introduction 779.2 Technical aspects 78

9.2.1 Present management methods 789.2.2 Research and development 819.2.3 The siting process 819.2.4 Safety and licensing 82

9.3 Economical aspects 839.3.1 Financial issues 83

9.4 Socio-political aspects 849.4.1 The role of politicians and public opinion 849.4.2 The socio-political aspects of the Wellenberg siting project 859.4.3 Conclusions and future implications 86

10 Nuclear waste management in the United Kingdom Nirex 8910.1 Introduction 8910.2 Technical aspects 90

10.2.1 Present management methods 9010.2.2 Research and development 9110.2.3 Safety and licensing 94

10.3 Economical aspects 9610.3.1 Financial issues 96

10.4 Socio-political aspects 9610.4.1 The role of politicians and public opinion 9610.4.2 Information and communication 97

10.5 Addendum 98

8

11 Nuclear waste management in the USA the Office ofCivilian Radioactive Waste Management (OCRWM) 99

11.1 Introduction 9911.2 Technical aspects 100

11.2.1 Present management methods 10011.2.2 Research and development 10311.2.3 Safety and licensing 103

11.3 Economical aspects 10411.3.1 Financial issues 104

11.4 Sociopolitical aspects 10411.4.1 The role of politicians and public opinion 104

11.5 Addendum 107

9

Introduction

1.1 Radwaste a national problem withinternational dimensions

Although most countries with nuclear power now seem to have opted for geologicaldisposal as the ultimate solution to the problem of processed or non-processed spentnuclear fuel, no state has yet made a definitive decision concerning siting. Althoughdifferent policies for radwaste management have developed in different countries, thebasic problem is the same everywhere: to find a location and a method for isolatingradwaste from the biosphere.1

Many nations with nuclear power have by now advanced beyond the pure research leveland are facing a complex implementation phase. The management of nuclear wasteinvolves technical, socio-political and economic aspects, such as:

Choice of system (technical and geological issues).

Choice of place (criteria for site selection).

Choice of decision-making process (closed or open, fixed or flexible, exclusive orinclusive).

Choice of financial system.

Gaining public trust and political acceptance.

In short, the challenge is to create a radwaste management system that is scientifically,politically and publicly acceptable. The scientific aspects of radwaste management haveundergone extensive development in a variety of countries. Research, development anddemonstration projects have been conducted with the aim of finding suitable natural andtechnical barriers that will ensure the safe disposal of radwaste. In an attempt to findadequate methods for the handling and disposal of radioactive waste, various types offormal and informal networks have been established within as well as between countries.Today, organisations such as the Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA), the InternationalAtomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and Euratom focus on international nuclear surveillanceand research, both with regard to nuclear power use and nuclear waste problems.

In recent decades, however, there has been a growing awareness that socio-pol