Unclassified NEA/RWM(2007)9 Organisation de Coopération et de Développement Economiques Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 18-Jun-2007 ___________________________________________________________________________________________ English - Or. English NUCLEAR ENERGY AGENCY RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE Unclassified NEA/RWM(2007)9 PROCEEDINGS OF THE TOPICAL SESSION OF THE RWMC 40TH MEETING ON: APPROACHES AND PRACTICES IN DECOMMISSIONING OF FACILITIES AND MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE FROM NON-NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE RELATED ACTIVITIES Held at the NEA Offices in Issy-les-Moulineaux, France on 14 March 2007 English - Or. English JT03229237 Document complet disponible sur OLIS dans son format d'origine Complete document available on OLIS in its original format NEA/RWM(2007)9 2 NEA/RWM(2007)9 FOREWORD Many activities in modern society involve the use of radioactive materials necessitating dedicated facilities for their production, application, and storage. This applies universally and, regardless of whether or not they are involved in nuclear fuel cycle related activities, all countries need frameworks for decommissioning of contaminated facilities and the construction of facilities for radioactive waste management in a manner that does not impact unduly on society in terms of safety and costs. Countries with nuclear power programmes are perhaps more likely to have in place the necessary infrastructure for dealing with non-power wastes. Nevertheless, a general concern exists about whether enough attention has been paid to small users and/or producers of radioactive materials, whether in academia, in medicine or in industry. Legacy waste is also an important issue in some countries. The exchange of the information about experiences of member countries in this area may thus be expected to have widespread benefits. The OECD/NEA Radioactive Waste Management Committee (RWMC) organised a Topical Session to discuss these issues on 15 March 2007 in Paris, during its 40th meeting. The aim of this topical session was to explore waste management approaches and practices in decommissioning of facilities and management of radioactive waste in relation to small users and/or producers of radioactive materials from non-fuel cycle activities for educational, medical or industrial purposes. Legacy facilities and waste will be covered in a separate topical session to be organised as part of the future programme of work of the committee. Information was exchanged on: • How countries have organized themselves (legislation, institutional arrangements etc.)? • What approaches and practices are being implemented? • What are the lessons to be learnt in terms of successful outcomes and difficulties experienced? Mr. Georg Arens, BMU (German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety) served as Chair of the Topical Session. 3 NEA/RWM(2007)9 4 NEA/RWM(2007)9 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Topical Session was devoted to the management of waste and the decommissioning of facilities associated with non nuclear fuel cycle activities, i.e. those typically in the fields of education, research, medicine and industry. National approaches in six member countries were presented orally, together with a short overview of relevant IAEA activities, after which an open discussion on relevant issues took place. In the coming months the RWMC Bureau intends to reflect on the various issues raised during the session, in order to consider what further items are appropriate for inclusion in future work programmes. It is apparent that a variety of waste management approaches are followed in different member countries. These normally include separation of short-lived waste, which, after decay, can be managed as conventional waste. In many countries long-lived wastes are kept in storage pending the development of suitable storage facilities, though some are proceeding with development of near surface disposal facilities for certain wastes, or are planning the refurbishment of existing facilities in line with present-day regulatory standards. Some countries with waste from both power and non- power applications choose to keep separate the management routes for the two categories of waste. Highly active waste including disused sealed sources cannot usually be emplaced in near-surface disposal facilities and therefore must be kept in storage, with an associated need for security measures, e.g. to protect against terrorist activity. This is therefore a high priority issue, at both national and international levels. Amongst the issues arising during the open discussion at the end of the session was the need to develop comprehensive waste management strategies for non-power waste, especially in member countries where no disposal route is currently available. This should include the provision of equipment properly to characterise the waste. It was noted that, in some countries, the costs of disposal of waste from small users is subsidised by the State, in recognition of the fact there is an overriding societal benefit to ensuring that such wastes are collected and safety managed. Similar considerations may apply to the costs of cleaning up sites contaminated as a result of historic practices such as radium production. As regards decommissioning, the operators of larger nuclear facilities such as research reactors or cyclotrons are normally required to prepare (and update regularly) decommissioning plans, including providing an estimate of decommissioning costs. The funding of decommissioning of larger facilities is often borne directly by the State - with funds provided on an as-needed basis - reflecting the fact that research and educational establishments are often State-owned. In the case of smaller facilities such as laboratories the regulatory approach is more typically to require that, after closure, these are decontaminated against pre-established standards and that waste is adequately managed. The costs are normally borne directly by the facility owner. In all cases, the availability and sufficiency of funds for decommissioning and management of the resulting waste is an important consideration that could inhibit progress in this area. 5 NEA/RWM(2007)9 6 NEA/RWM(2007)9 TABLE OF CONTENTS FOREWORD ......................................................................................................................................... 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................... 5 OVERVIEW OF PRESENTATIONS AND MODERATED DISCUSSIONS...................................... 9 APPENDIX 1: AGENDA................................................................................................................. 15 APPENDIX 2: QUESTIONNAIRE.................................................................................................. 19 APPENDIX 3: CONTRIBUTED PAPERS: AUSTRALIA ......................................................................................... 25 BELGIUM ............................................................................................ 43 CANADA .............................................................................................. 55 CZECH REPUBLIC ............................................................................. 65 DENMARK .......................................................................................... 69 FRANCE .............................................................................................. 71 HUNGARY ........................................................................................... 75 IAEA ..................................................................................................... 77 ITALY ................................................................................................... 83 JAPAN .................................................................................................. 89 NETHERLANDS .................................................................................. 93 NORWAY ............................................................................................. 99 SLOVAK REPUBLIC ......................................................................... 107 SPAIN ................................................................................................ 109 APPENDIX 4: LIST OF PARTICIPANTS .................................................................................... 119 7 NEA/RWM(2007)9 8 NEA/RWM(2007)9 OVERVIEW OF PRESENTATIONS AND MODERATED DISCUSSIONS The Topical Session was opened by Mr. G. Arens (BMU1 , Germany), Session Chair, who welcomed the participants. He noted that the scheduled presentations reflected a range of national situations and covered a variety of issues including, for example, funding considerations and the definition of responsibilities. On that basis, he anticipated a fruitful exchange of views. In the first presentation Mrs. M-C. Dupuis (ANDRA) noted that the French national waste management agency (ANDRA) was responsible for the long-term management of waste both from the nuclear power generating sector and from smaller producers (including hospitals, universities and research institutes). In the latter case, ANDRA takes over control of about 200 cubic metres of waste each year. ANDRA’s statutory responsibilities include waste collection, characterisation, conditioning, processing and ultimate disposal. It was noted that adapted systems were in place for the management of two specific