DOCSLIB.ORG

Strategy and Methodology for Radioactive Waste Characterization

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Strategy and Methodology for Radioactive Waste Characterization IAEA-TECDOC-1537 Strategy and Methodology for Radioactive Waste Characterization March 2007 IAEA-TECDOC-1537 Strategy and Methodology for Radioactive Waste Characterization March 2007 The originating Section of this publication in the IAEA was: Waste Technology Section International Atomic Energy Agency Wagramer Strasse 5 P.O. Box 100 A-1400 Vienna, Austria STRATEGY AND METHODOLOGY FOR RADIOACTIVE WASTE CHARACTERIZATION IAEA, VIENNA, 2007 IAEA-TECDOC-1537 ISBN 92–0–100207–6 ISSN 1011–4289 © IAEA, 2007 Printed by the IAEA in Austria March 2007 FOREWORD Radioactive waste management requires planned and systematic actions to provide confidence that the entire system, processes and final products will satisfy given requirements for quality. In order to ensure a quality end product, it is absolutely necessary to know and control the chemical and radiochemical parameters within the entire waste management life cycle, with special emphasis on waste conditioning, storage and disposal. Testing and analyses to demonstrate the radioactive content and the quality of final waste forms and waste packages are key components of this knowledge and control and are essential to accurate characterization of the waste. Reliable and effective methods for measuring radiological, physical, chemical, radiochemical and other characteristics have been established in many Member States, and the IAEA has several technical reports series on the subject. However, none of the existing IAEA publications has attempted to present a strategy and methodology for waste characterization which takes into account the origin of the waste, the different waste streams, the situation of the analytical laboratories, and the analytical technologies and techniques available. Neither has any attempt been made to offer any selection of standards that are used in the radio- analysis laboratories. To cover this gap, the IAEA initiated a task that was intended to give recommendations on harmonization in waste characterization. During drafting, the scope was appropriately expanded to provide a more comprehensive examination of strategies for radioactive waste characterization. The preparation of the report was accomplished through two consultant meetings in November 2002 and March 2004, along with one technical meeting held in March 2003. A final comprehensive review was performed August–September 2006 to verify the information remained current and relevant prior to publication. In total, 19 experts from 13 Member States and the IAEA participated at different stages in the development process. The IAEA wishes to express its appreciation to all those individuals who took part in the preparation and publication of this report. Particular acknowledgement is due to P. Van Iseghem, Belgium, who chaired both consultants meetings and the technical meeting, as well as contributing great effort toward the completion and technical review. The officer at the IAEA responsible for initiating this report was R. Burcl of the Division of Nuclear Fuel Cycle and Waste Technology. J.L. González Gómez and J.J. Kelly of the same division finalized the report for publication. EDITORIAL NOTE The use of particular designations of countries or territories does not imply any judgement by the publisher, the IAEA, as to the legal status of such countries or territories, of their authorities and institutions or of the delimitation of their boundaries. The mention of names of specific companies or products (whether or not indicated as registered) does not imply any intention to infringe proprietary rights, nor should it be construed as an endorsement or recommendation on the part of the IAEA. CONTENTS SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................... 1 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 3 1.1. Background ............................................................................................................ 3 1.2. Objective ................................................................................................................ 3 1.3. Scope ......................................................................................................................4 1.4. Structure ................................................................................................................. 4 2. STRATEGY IN DEFINING THE CHARACTERIZATION PROGRAMME................ 5 2.1. Background ............................................................................................................ 5 2.2. Types of waste........................................................................................................ 6 2.2.1. Definitions of new waste and historical waste ........................................... 6 2.2.2. Waste subtypes........................................................................................... 7 2.3. Requirements........................................................................................................ 10 2.4. Life cycle.............................................................................................................. 10 2.4.1. Planning and Waste Generation ............................................................... 11 2.4.2. Treatment ................................................................................................. 12 2.4.3. Conditioning............................................................................................. 12 2.4.4. Storage and disposal................................................................................. 12 2.5. Development of characterization programme strategy......................................... 13 2.5.1. Principle issues and development of waste acceptance criteria ............... 13 2.5.2. Elements of characterization programmes ............................................... 14 2.5.3. Quality assurance and quality control ...................................................... 15 2.6. Organization and responsibility............................................................................ 15 2.6.1. Responsibilities of the regulator/licensing authority................................ 16 2.6.2. Responsibilities of the generator of the waste.......................................... 16 2.6.3. Responsibilities of the treatment/conditioning/storage operator.............. 17 2.6.4. Responsibilities of the operator of the disposal facility (operating company, agency).................................................................................... 17 2.6.5. Independent verification........................................................................... 18 2.7. Cost and benefits of waste characterization ......................................................... 19 2.7.1. Process knowledge ................................................................................... 19 2.7.2. Timing of waste characterization efforts.................................................. 20 3. IMPORTANT FACTORS TO CONSIDER IN DEFINING A WASTE CHARACTERIZATION PLAN..................................................................................... 20 3.1. Scaling factor methodology.................................................................................. 20 3.2. Accuracy considerations....................................................................................... 21 3.2.1. Introduction .............................................................................................. 21 3.2.2. Checking the homogeneity of a waste stream and sampling.................... 22 3.2.3. Selection of the key nuclides.................................................................... 24 3.2.4. Measurement methods.............................................................................. 24 3.2.5. Reference materials, proficiency tests; associated traceability................. 28 3.2.6. Consensus standards................................................................................. 36 3.3. Calculation and model uncertainty....................................................................... 37 3.4. Uncertainty propagation ....................................................................................... 39 4. CHARACTERIZATION METHODOLOGY APPLICATION TO THE DIFFERENT WASTE CATEGORIES .......................................................................... 43 4.1. Introduction/applicability of scaling factor method ............................................. 43 4.2. Simple and stable waste streams .......................................................................... 45 4.2.1. Enrichment, conversion, fuel fabrication ................................................. 45 4.2.2. Nuclear power plant ................................................................................. 48 4.2.3. Spent fuel.................................................................................................. 49 4.3. Complex and stable waste streams....................................................................... 50 4.3.1. Nuclear power plant ................................................................................. 50 4.3.2. Reprocessing ............................................................................................ 50 4.3.3. Waste form............................................................................................... 54 4.4. Simple and variable waste streams — Examples of nuclear research
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 小型飛翔体／海外 ［Format 2］ Technical Catalog Category
    小型飛翔体／海外 ［Format 2］ Technical Catalog Category Airborne contamination sensor Title Depth Evaluation of Entrained Products (DEEP) Proposed by Create Technologies Ltd & Costain Group PLC １．DEEP is a sensor analysis software for analysing contamination. DEEP can distinguish between surface contamination and internal / absorbed contamination. The software measures contamination depth by analysing distortions in the gamma spectrum. The method can be applied to data gathered using any spectrometer. Because DEEP provides a means of discriminating surface contamination from other radiation sources, DEEP can be used to provide an estimate of surface contamination without physical sampling. DEEP is a real-time method which enables the user to generate a large number of rapid contamination assessments- this data is complementary to physical samples, providing a sound basis for extrapolation from point samples. It also helps identify anomalies enabling targeted sampling startegies. DEEP is compatible with small airborne spectrometer/ processor combinations, such as that proposed by the ARM-U project – please refer to the ARM-U proposal for more details of the air vehicle. Figure 1: DEEP system core components are small, light, low power and can be integrated via USB, serial or Ethernet interfaces. 小型飛翔体／海外 Figure 2: DEEP prototype software ２．Past experience (plants in Japan, overseas plant, applications in other industries, etc) Create technologies is a specialist R&D firm with a focus on imaging and sensing in the nuclear industry. Createc has developed and delivered several novel nuclear technologies, including the N-Visage gamma camera system. Costainis a leading UK construction and civil engineering firm with almost 150 years of history.
    [Show full text]
  • Radiological Basics
    Transportation Emergency Preparedness Program MERRTT Radiological Basics INTRODUCTION The reliance upon, and use of, radioactive material in agriculture, notesnotes industry, and medicine continues to increase. As the manufacture, notesnotes use, and disposal of radioactive material has increased, so has the need to transport it. Consequently, the potential for you as a responder to encounter an incident involving some type of radioactive material has increased. Having knowledge of radiological hazards, and the terminology used to describe them, will increase your ability to quickly recognize, safely respond, and accurately relay information during an incident involving radioactive material. PURPOSE Upon completion of this module, you will have a better understanding of the basic structure of an atom and the fundamentals of radiation. MODULE OBJECTIVES Upon completion of this module, you will be able to: 1. Identify the basic components of an atom. 2. Define ionizing radiation, radioactivity, radioactive material, and radioactive contamination. 3. Distinguish between radiation and contamination. 4. Identify some commonly transported sources of radioactive material. 01/05 rev. 3 2-1 Transportation Emergency Preparedness Program MERRTT Radiological Basics BACKGROUND notesnotes Radiation is all around us and has been present since the birth of notesnotes this planet. Today, both man-made and natural radioactive material are part of our daily lives. We use radioactive material for beneficial purposes, such as generating electricity and diagnosing and treating medical conditions. Radiation is used in many ways to improve our health and the quality of our lives. In 1895, while working in his laboratory, Wilhelm Roentgen discovered a previously unknown phenomenon: rays that could penetrate solid objects.
    [Show full text]
  • Nuclear Energy & the Environmental Debate
    FEATURES Nuclear energy & the environmental debate: The context of choices Through international bodies on climate change, the roles of nuclear power and other energy options are being assessed by Evelyne ^Environmental issues are high on international mental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which Bertel and Joop agendas. Governments, interest groups, and citi- has been active since 1988. Since the energy Van de Vate zens are increasingly aware of the need to limit sector is responsible for the major share of an- environmental impacts from human activities. In thropogenic greenhouse gas emissions, interna- the energy sector, one focus has been on green- tional organisations having expertise and man- house gas emissions which could lead to global date in the field of energy, such as the IAEA, are climate change. The issue is likely to be a driving actively involved in the activities of these bodies. factor in choices about energy options for elec- In this connection, the IAEA participated in the tricity generation during the coming decades. preparation of the second Scientific Assessment Nuclear power's future will undoubtedly be in- Report (SAR) of the Intergovernmental Panel on fluenced by this debate, and its potential role in Climate Change (IPCC). reducing environmental impacts from the elec- The IAEA has provided the IPCC with docu- tricity sector will be of central importance. mented information and results from its ongoing Scientifically there is little doubt that increas- programmes on the potential role of nuclear ing atmospheric levels of greenhouse gases, such power in alleviating the risk of global climate as carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane, will cause change.
    [Show full text]
  • Radioactive Waste
    Radioactive Waste 07/05/2011 1 Regulations 2 Regulations 1. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) 10 CFR 20 Subpart K. Various approved options for radioactive waste disposal. (See also Appendix F) 10 CFR 35.92. Decay in storage of medically used byproduct material. 10 CFR 60. Disposal of high-level wastes in geologic repositories. 10 CFR 61. Shallow land disposal of low level waste. 10 CFR 62. Criteria and procedures for emergency access to non-Federal and regional low-level waste disposal facilities. 10 CFR 63. Disposal of high-level rad waste at Yucca Mountain, NV 10 CFR 71 Subpart H. Quality assurance for waste packaging and transportation. 10 CFR 72. High level waste storage at an MRS 3 Regulations 2. Department of Energy (DOE) DOE Order 435.1 Radioactive Waste Management. General Requirements regarding radioactive waste. 10 CFR 960. General Guidelines for the Recommendation of Sites for the Nuclear Waste Repositories. Site selection guidelines for a waste repository. The following are not regulations but they provide guidance regarding the implementation of DOE Order 435.1: DOE Manual 435.1-1. Radioactive Waste Management Manual. Describes the requirements and establishes specific responsibilities for implementing DOE O 435.1. DOE Guide 435.1-1. Suggestions and acceptable ways of implementing DOE M 435.1-1 4 Regulations 3. Environmental Protection Agency 40 CFR 191. Environmental Standards for the Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel, High-level and Transuranic Radioactive Wastes. Protection for the public over the next 10,000 years from the disposal of high-level and transuranic wastes. 4. Department of Transportation 49 CFR Parts 171 to 177.
    [Show full text]
  • Data Base for Radioactive Waste Management, Waste Source Options Report
    NUREG/CR-1759 Vol. 2 Data Base for Data Base for, Radioactive Waste Management Waste Source Options Report Manuscript Completed: August 1981 Date Published: November 1981 Prepared by R. E. Wild, 0. I. Oztunali, J. J. Clancy, C. J. Pitt, E. D. Picazo Dames and Moore, Inc. 20 Haarlem Avenue White Plains, NY 10603 Prepared for Division of Waste Management Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20556 NRC FIN B6420 Availability of Reference Materials Cited in NRC Publications Most documents cited in NRC publications will be available from one of the following sources: 1. The NRC Public Document Room, 1717 H Street., N.W. Washington, DC 20555 2. The NRC/GPO Sales Program, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555 3. The National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161 Although the listing that follows represents the majority of documents cited in NRC publications, it is not intended to be exhaustive. Referenced documents available for inspection and copying for a fee from the NRC Public Document Room include NRC correspondence and internal NRC memoranda; NRC Office of Inspection and Enforce- ment bulletins, circulars, information notices, inspection and investigation notices; Licensee Event Reports; vendor reports and correspondence; Commission papers; and applicant and licensee documents and correspondence. The following documents in the NUREG series are available for purchase from the NRC/GPO Sales Pro- gram: formal NRC staff and contractor reports, NRC-sponsored conference proceedings, and NRC booklets and brochures. Also available are Regulatory Guides, NRC regulations in the Code of Federal Regulations, and Nuclear Regulatory Commission Issuances.
    [Show full text]
  • Radioactive Waste Management of Fusion Power Plants
    14 Radioactive Waste Management of Fusion Power Plants Luigi Di Pace1, Laila El-Guebaly2, Boris Kolbasov3, Vincent Massaut4 and Massimo Zucchetti5 1EURATOM/ENEA Fusion Association, ENEA C.R Frascati 2University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin 3Kurchatov Institute, Moscow 4SCK – CEN, Mol 5EURATOM/ENEA Fusion Association, Politecnico di Torino, Torino 1,5Italy 2USA 3Russia 4Belgium 1. Introduction This chapter outlines the attractive environmental features of nuclear fusion, presents an integral scheme to manage fusion activated materials during operation and after decommissioning, compares the volume of fusion and fission waste, covers the recycling, clearance, and disposal concepts and their official radiological limits, and concludes with a section summarizing the newly developed strategy for fusion power plants. As fusion plays an essential role in the future energy market providing an environmentally attractive source of nuclear energy (Ongena & Van Oost, 2001), it is predictable that there will be tens of fusion power plants commissioned worldwide on an annual basis by the end of the 21st century. The ability of these fusion power plants to handle the radioactive waste stream during operation and after decommissioning suggests re-evaluating the underground disposal option at the outset before considering the environmental impact statement needed for licensing applications. Adopting the 1970s preferred approach of disposing the activated materials in geological repositories after plant decommissioning is becoming difficult to envision because of the limited capacity of existing repositories, difficulty of building new ones, tighter environmental control, and radwaste burden for future generations. Alternatively, fusion scientists are currently promoting a new strategy: avoid underground disposal as much as possible, implement at the maximum extent the recycling of activated materials within the nuclear industry, and/or the clearance and release to commercial markets if materials contain traces of radioactivity.
    [Show full text]
  • ITER Is a Showcase ... for the Drawbacks of Fusion Energy | Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 2/15/18, 5:28 PM
    ITER is a showcase ... for the drawbacks of fusion energy | Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 2/15/18, 5:28 PM Search Advanced Search the Bulletin Search ANALYSIS (/FEATURE-TYPE/ANALYSIS) 14 FEBRUARY 2018 ITER is a showcase ... for the drawbacks of fusion energy Daniel Jassby A year ago, I wrote a critique of fusion as an energy source, titled “Fusion reactors: Not what they’re cracked up to be DANIEL JASSBY (https://thebulletin.org/fusion-reactors-not-what-they’re-cracked-be10699).” That article generated a lot of interest, (/BIO/DANIEL- JASSBY) judging from the more than 100 reader comments it generated. Consequently, I was asked to write a follow-up and Daniel Jassby was a continue the conversation with Bulletin readers. principal research physicist at the... But first, some background, for the benefit of those just coming into the room. More (/bio/daniel- I am a research physicist, who worked on nuclear fusion experiments for 25 years at the Princeton Plasma Physics Lab jassby) (http://www.pppl.gov/) in New Jersey. My research interests were in the areas of plasma physics and neutron SUBSCRIBE production related to fusion-energy research and development. Now that I have retired, I have begun to look at the (/BIO/10700/FEE whole fusion enterprise more dispassionately, and I feel that a working, everyday, commercial fusion reactor would D) cause more problems than it would solve. So I feel obligated to dispel some of the gee-whiz hyperbole that has sprung up around fusion power, which has been regularly heralded as the “perfect” energy source and touted all too often as the magic bullet solution to the world’s energy problems.
    [Show full text]
  • Technical and Social Problems of Nuclear Waste
    Received: 1 October 2017 Revised: 6 January 2018 Accepted: 8 January 2018 DOI: 10.1002/wene.289 ADVANCED REVIEW Technical and social problems of nuclear waste M. V. Ramana Liu Institute for Global Issues, School of Public Policy and Global Affairs, University of British Despite decades of effort, the nuclear industry does not yet have a working solu- Columbia, Vancouver, Canada tion for managing spent fuel and high level waste, the most radioactive products Correspondence generated by nuclear power plants. Although many scientific and technical bodies M. V. Ramana, Liu Institute for Global Issues, have endorsed geological disposal as the preferred solution to this problem, there School of Public Policy and Global Affairs, University of British Columbia, 6476 NW Marine remain significant uncertainties about the long-term performance of repositories Drive, Vancouver, BC, Canada V6T 1Z2. and behavior of the nuclear wastes to be stored in these facilities. Apart from a Email: [email protected] minority of countries, most countries have not chosen any sites for a repository. Further concerns about the long-term safety of repositories arise from the experi- ences of failures and accidents at pilot facilities. One reason for the absence of operating repositories decades after they were first proposed is widespread public opposition to such facilities. Polls have revealed that substantial majorities of peo- ple consider nuclear waste with dread and do not approve plans to dispose of radioactive wastes near them, or, often, far away either. Nuclear power advocates have typically dismissed public concerns as resulting from a lack of understanding of scientific facts but this explanation does not withstand scrutiny.
    [Show full text]
  • Vanderbilt Wilson County Hospital Radiation Safety Manual
    Vanderbilt Wilson County Hospital Radiation Safety Manual VWCH Radiation Safety Manual 2021 1 Table of Contents Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................ 4 Section 1: Roles and Responsibilities ..................................................................................................................................... 5 A. VWCH Radiation Safety Committee (RSC) .............................................................................................................. 5 C. Radiation Safety Officer (RSO) ................................................................................................................................. 5 D. Authorized User Physician ......................................................................................................................................... 6 E. Radiation Worker ....................................................................................................................................................... 6 Section 2: Clinical Radioactive Material Use ......................................................................................................................... 8 A. Radiation Safety Training Requirements ................................................................................................................... 8 B. Facilities and Equipment ...........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Signature Research on Legacy Management at the National Nuclear Laboratory, United Kingdom - 10362
    Signature Research on Legacy Management at the National Nuclear Laboratory, United Kingdom - 10362 A. W. Banford National Nuclear Laboratory, Risley, Warrington, Cheshire, WA3 6AS, United Kingdom ABSTRACT The United Kingdom (UK) National Nuclear Laboratory (NNL) is establishing four Signature Research Areas, which will underpin the future requirements of the UK nuclear Industry. The management of radioactive waste, nuclear plant and sites at the end of operations is a significant challenge in the UK and internationally. Therefore the NNL Signature Research Area on Legacy Management aims to address this challenge. The key theme of the research area is to inform and underpin the development of strategies for legacy management through an understanding of the nature of the waste inventory, the potential endpoints and the identification of possible processing options. This strategic approach aims to identify the key challenges, identify required evolutionary changes to existing technologies and identify areas in which revolutionary change could make most impact. This paper provides a technical overview of the UK’s National Nuclear Laboratory Signature Research Area on Legacy Management; which will focus on the range of technical areas notably; • strategy development • waste, facility and land characterisation • waste behaviour • decontamination • retrieval and remote deployment • decommissioning techniques • contaminated land and site end points. INTRODUCTION A series of four Signature Research Areas have been identified as being central to the United Kingdom National Nuclear Laboratory mission, to provide independent, authoritative advice on nuclear issues. These areas encompass activities which are of strategic significance to the NNL and both the UK and international nuclear industry. The four areas are defined as follows, • Fuel and Reactors • Spent Fuel and Nuclear Materials [1] • Legacy Waste and Decommissioning • Waste Processing, Storage and Disposal Collectively these areas cover most of the nuclear fuel cycle.
    [Show full text]
  • Radiation Protection Guides
    [Year] Rad iation Protection Guide For Medical Use of Radioactive Materials & Radiation Producing Machines EHS Radiation Safety 122 Grand Ave. Ct. Ph. 319-335-8501 March 2009 The University of Iowa prohibits discrimination in employment and in its educational programs and activities on the basis of race, national origin, color, creed, religion, sex, age, disability, veteran status, sexual orientation, gender identity, or associational preference. The University also affirms its commitment to providing equal opportunities and equal access to University facilities. For additional information on nondiscrimination policies, contact the Coordinator of Title IX, Section 504, and the ADA in the Office of Affirmative Action, (319) 335-0705 (voice) or (319) 335-0697 (text), 202 Jessup Hall, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa, 52242- 1316. PREFACE The University of Iowa is committed to providing its patients, visitors, students and employees with an environment where sources of radiation are used safely for the purposes of medicine, research and teaching. Attainment of this goal requires the cooperation and commitment of all persons involved. The Environmental Health & Safety (formerly Health Protection Office) is responsible for implementing the University’s radiation safety program as defined by its Radiation Safety Committees, broadscope license, and state and federal regulations. Department heads, faculty members, supervisors and individual users are directly responsible for maintaining an environment that promotes compliance with these
    [Show full text]
  • Management of Radioactive Waste Containing Graphite: Overview of Methods
    energies Review Management of Radioactive Waste Containing Graphite: Overview of Methods Leon Fuks * , Irena Herdzik-Koniecko, Katarzyna Kiegiel and Grazyna Zakrzewska-Koltuniewicz Centre for Radiochemistry and Nuclear Chemistry, Institute of Nuclear Chemistry and Technology, 16 Dorodna, 03-161 Warszawa, Poland; [email protected] (I.H.-K.); [email protected] (K.K.); [email protected] (G.Z.-K.) * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +48-22-504-1360 Received: 30 July 2020; Accepted: 4 September 2020; Published: 7 September 2020 Abstract: Since the beginning of the nuclear industry, graphite has been widely used as a moderator and reflector of neutrons in nuclear power reactors. Some reactors are relatively old and have already been shut down. As a result, a large amount of irradiated graphite has been generated. Although several thousand papers in the International Nuclear Information Service (INIS) database have discussed the management of radioactive waste containing graphite, knowledge of this problem is not common. The aim of the paper is to present the current status of the methods used in different countries to manage graphite-containing radioactive waste. Attention has been paid to the methods of handling spent TRISO fuel after its discharge from high-temperature gas-cooled reactors (HTGR) reactors. Keywords: graphite; irradiated graphite; graphite processing; radioactive waste; waste management; waste disposal; spent TRISO fuel 1. Introduction As of December 31, 2018, 451 nuclear power reactors were in operation and produced 392,779 MWe of electricity. Fifty-five reactors, with a net capacity of 57,441 MWe, were under construction, while 172 reactors were permanently shut down [1].
    [Show full text]