Proceedings of the Seminar on Eurochemic Experience

June 9-11, 1983, Mol, Belgium

W. Drtnt E. Delande (editors^

April, 1984 SEMINAR ON EUROCHEMIC EXPERIENCE

June 9-11, 19*3, Mol, Belgium

Honorary Committee

P. Huet, Counsel of State, Paris, France. L.A. Nojd, Chairman of Eurochemic's Board of Liquidators. R. Rometsch, President of NAGRA, Baden, Switzerland. H.K. Shapar, Director-general of NEA, Paris, France. Y. Sousselier, Chairman of Eurochemic's Technical Committee.

Organizing Committee

E. Detilieux (president), Eurochemic, Mol, Belgium. W. Drent (secretary), Eurochemic, Mol, Belgium. H. Eschrich, Eurochemic, Mol, Belgium. R. Grolade, USSI, Bagneux, France. R. Kroebel, KfK, Karlsruhe, Germany (FR). F. Marcus, Ris«£ Establishment, Roskilde, Denmark. 0. Martinet le, Eurochemic, Mol, Belgium. F. Rolandi, ENEA, Rome, Italy. P. Strohl, NEA, Paris, France.

Organized by the European Company for the Chemical Processing of Irradiated Fuels (Eurochem i c ) under the patronage of the OECP Nuclear Energy Agency TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

Opening Remarks E. Det i Ileux Introductory Remarks H.K. Shapar

First Session: HISTORICAL OVERVIEW OF THE EUROCHEMIC COMPANY

Introduct i on Y. SousseI i er Eurochemic, origine et principales étapes P. Huet 1 L'expérience d'Eurochemic en ce qui concerne les aspects institutionnels de la coopération internationale en matière scientifique et technique P. Strohl 9 Eurochemic and the Law of the Host Country 0. von Busekist 15 The United States - Eurochemic Assistance Programme E.M. Shank 29 Construction and Startup of the Reprocessing Plant T. Barendregt 37 Survey on Research and Development, Safety and Safeguards R. Rometsch 45 Operation of the Plant and the Period after Shutdown E. Det i Ileux 53

Second Session: TECHNICAL EXPERIENCE OF EUROCHEMIC

R&D Achievements at Eurochemic H. Eschrich 67 Eurochemic Plant Operation Experience B. Gustafs&on and L. Geens 83 Eurochemic Experience in Process Control and Safeguards Ana Iyses R. Berg and H. Bokelund 95 Safeguards Experience Gained at Eurochemic E. Van der Stijl 103 Decontamination, Decommissioning and Waste Management at Eurochem i c W. Hild 107 Development Work on Waste Conditioning J. van Geel 121 Health and Safety Aspects of Reprocessing at Eurochemic A. Osipenco 129 Third Session: PANEL ON APPLICATION OF EUROCHEMIC EXPERIENCE

Int roduct i or. F. Marcus 139 Future Developments for Fuel Reprocessing and Radioactive Waste Management R. Kroebel 141 Influence of Eurochemic Experience on the Japanese and French Reprocessing Plants M. Lung 147 Application of Eurochemic Experience at EMEA S. Cao lr.Q The Evolution of National Policy in the Federal Republic of Germany on Fuel Cycle and Radwaste Management W. Schüller 16.J Application of Eurochemic Experience at Urenco J. Asyee In1- Spent Fuel Transportation - More Than 20 Years of Experience H. Keese 173 Use of Eurochemic Experience in a Conventional Electric Power Stat i on J. Klitgaard 1/9 What the Staff of a Licensing Authority Could Have Gained From Peing Employed By Eurochem c W. Hun=inger lsl Application of Experience Gained at. Eurochemic in Critical ity Control, Shielding and Nuclear Safety H. Zünd 183 Eurochemic and the Belgian Nuclear Programme P. Dejonghe 1^7 Conclusions of the Third Session F. Marcus 191

Fourth Session: CONCLUSIONS

Eurochemic et la coopération internationale dans It ret ra i tement Y . Sousselier 193 Impressions of a Senior Member of the Board S. Ter.jesen 199 Eurochemic: A Challenge or a Lost, Opportunity ? W. Heinz and R.P. Rand! 203 L'avenir du retraitement en Belgique M. Frerotte 209

CLOSING

Conclusive Remarks F. Knoops 215 Address of Thanks E. IV t iI I eux 219 CI os i ng Remarks L.A. No.jd 223

LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

! 1ST OF AIM HOR.- INTRODUCTION

Does a family gathering need an introduction ? The editors of these proceedings discussed it on various occasions, the one being a long time member of the Eurochemic family, the other only having become a member when the family was already splitt i ng up.

Of course, the members of the Eurochemic family and the people having attended the Seminar on Eurochemic Experience do not need any further introduction. They know Eurochemic served as the home base for many a nuclear chemist, physicist, business man throughout Europe. But for the new­ comers, and for those who maybe wi I I serve the new Company, we thought it useful to stress once again that Eurochemic is not only a technical achievement, but also a unique social achievement, giving birth to lifelong friendships and business ties all over the world.

So we decided to render the papers as they were presented, without cutting the small talk. In that way, we hope every reader will be convinced of the fact that Eurochemic has been worth its money.

Wi!lem DRENT Els DELANDE OPENING REMARKS

by Emile Detilieux, Manager of Eurochemic

Thanks to the collaboration of many of you, this review of the adventure of Euro­ chemic can be made: the creation of the company, the design and construction of the facilities, the operation, and finally the shutdown of the plant.

This seminar takes place 25 years after the start of the work on the Eurochemic project. Indeed, the research and study office created in the frame of the European Nuclear Energy Agency ordered its first offices in the laboratories of the SCKICEN in April 1958.

But the seminar also takes place on a turning point in the history of this adven­ ture Eurochemic. On the one side, the programme still carried out on an interna­ tional basis comes towards an end. But on the other hand, recent decisions taken in Belgium let us hope that the plant will be reopened.

It is in this perspective that I wish all of you an interesting seminar. INTRODUCTORY REMARKS

by Howard K. Shapar, Director-general of NEA

ƒ( is my pleasure to be here with you today and take part in the Seminar on Euro- chemic Experience. To me, this meeting has also the flavour of an anniversary, because we are celebrating the quarter of a century of a unique international co­ operation in one of the most challenging areas of nuclear technology.

Set up in 1959, the Company is indeed a major example of successful technical co­ operation in the nuclear field. In the 25 year record, the international cooperation is a significant achievement in which the Agency takes pride and satisfaction.

The NEA, which celebrated its own anniversary earlier this year, attaches particu­ lar importance to Eurochemic, its oldest joint undertaking and one of the three ma­ jor projects originally set up, the other two being of course the Halden reactor project and the Dragon gas-cooled reactor project.

All three were created when Europe recognized the importance of nuclear energy and the clear advantage of cooperating in the development work and the expense. Euro­ chemic was the only joint undertaking which did not concern the reactors. But the member countries required the technology of reprocessing, training experts and gaining experience in building and operating a reprocessing plant. The Company has also made significant progress in the technology of reprocessing, and now Eurochemic is engaged in the management of radioactive waste and has therefore the same pioneering role as it had at the start in a sector which is as important in the development of nuclear energy as reprocessing.

We therefore granted our sponsorship for this seminar devoted to the analysis of the experiences of international cooperation on both technical and legal points of view.

The successive steps in the life of Eurochemic demonstrate how, throughout the years, the Company has given particular attention to the evolving needs of its par­ ticipants in the field of reprocessing, and has oriented its successive programmes of work to keep abreast of development. In the two and a half decades of its ex­ perience, Eurochemic has provided its participants with experience on technique of reprocessing and waste management techniques well suited to their rrquirrmrn^s. Several generations of scientists were able to gather their experience through Euro- chemtc and to collaborate with many other scientists. We are happy to see here to­ day so many former members of the Eurochemic team. But 1 feel sure that meaning­ ful experience is still to be gained.

I would like tc thank the Belgian authorities once again for the active support they have always given to each of our joint undertakings. International cooperation is an essential element, and I hope that Eurochemic, under whatever form its re­ birth takes place, will pursue its useful work for many years to come.

I wish you a most interesting seminar. First Session HISTORICAL OVERVIEW OF THE EUROCHEMIC COMPANY

Chairman

Yves Sousselier Chairman of Eurochemic's Technical Committee

Speakers

Pierre Huet Conseiller d'Etat, Paris, France Pierre Strohl Directeur général adjoint de l'AEN Otto von Busekist Secretary of the Board of Eurochemic Ear I Shank Former American adviser to Eurochemic Teun Barendregt Former technical director of Eurochemic's reprocessing plant Rudolf Rometsch Former general manager of Eurochemic Emile DetiIleux Manager of Eurochemic Introduction

Y. Sousselier

Un après-midi de 1956, mon patron m'appelait dans son bureau et m'a dit: Il y a Goldschmidt qui m'envoie demain à une réunion à l'OCDE, sur la construction d'une usine de retraitement. Ni Goldschmidt ni moi nous croyons que cela se fera jamais. Cela n'a vraiment aucun intérêt, mais enfin, il faut qu'on y soit repré­ senté. Je n 'ai pas de temps à perdre, est-ce que vous pouvez y aller ?

Et j'étais à cette réunion. Cela a été ma première rencontre avec un certain nombre de personnes que je suis heureux de retrouver ici. Cela a été aussi le début d'une aventure assez extraordinaire, que nous allons revivre au cours de ces deux jours, et spécialement au cours de cette première session, et je m'en réjouis avec vous.

Je crois qu'il était, ,rès important de tenir ce séminaire, à un moment où il y aura quand-même une fin d'Eurochemic, même si les Belges vont continuer. Je crois qu'il est utile de montrer q-i'un bon travail a été fait. Nous allons le voir en particu­ lier au cours de cette première session, et je vais demander à Monsieur Huet, qui est, je crois, le père d'Eurochemic, de vous parler de cette Société, de son origine et ses principales étapes. 1

EUROCHEMIC, ORIGINE ET PRINCIPALES ETAPES

P. Huet

Dans cet exposé, je passerai en revue les grandes étapes dans la vie d'Eurochemic, depuis l'origine de nos négociations, c'est à dire la création, en 1956, du premier syndicat d'étude, laissant à mes collègues le soin de développer les aspects juri­ diques et techniques de cette aventure.

Mais il ne faut pas que cet excercice soit seulement une occasion de ruminer ensem­ ble notre passé. Nous devons tirer des leçons de l'expérience, et pour cela je m'at­ tacherai à vous montrer trois choses: Comment les événements se sont enchaînés; quelles ont été les causes des principales décisions prises; et pourquoi les prévi­ sions ont été soit confirmées, soit souvent contredites par les faits. C'est peut-être cela qui est le plus intéressant.

1. Création d'Eurochemic (1956-57)

La création d'Eurochemic a été liée très étroitement à celle de l'Agence (AEEN), et ce n'est pas un hasard si le premier rapport du Comité de direction de l'énergie nucléaire au Conseil de l'OECE, en septembre 1957, s'intitule: L'Agence européenne pour l'énergie nucléaire et la société Eurochemic.

Dès 1957 j'avais compris qu'il ne fallait créer l'Agence que si au moins un projet de coopération européenne paraissait susceptible d'aboutir. Et de tous ceux que nous avions mis à l'étude, c'est le projet de l'usine de retraitement qui a aboutit en premier, peut-être parce qu'il bénéficiait d'un certain soutient politique. Les pays qui s'engagaient à l'époque dans le système de contrôle de sécurité que l'Agence Internationale de l'Energie Atomique était chargée d'appliquer ne pouvai­ ent qu'être favorables à la mise en commun des moyens de retraitement, soumis à un contrôle international qui comportait un droit de suite sur les combustibles pro­ venant de ce retraitement. C'est pourquoi nous avions préparé un accord sur le contrôle de sécurité calqué sur le système de l'Agence internationale en même temps que la convention créant Eurochemic.

Au point de vue technique, la Conférence de Genève de 1955 avait permis la publi­ cation d'informations sur le retraitement. Mais trois pays seulement disposaient d'une expérience industrielle dans ce domaine: les Etats-Unis, la Grande Bretagne 2

et la France. Ils ont tous les trois aidé k la création d'Eurochemic, bien que la France seule y ait participé. La délégation américaine vait fourni au syndicat d'étude toutes les informations qu'elle pouvait comnuniquer et un accord a été con­ clu par la suite avec la Commission à l'Energie Atomique qui a détaché pendant quelque temps un spécialiste auprès de la Société. La Grande Bretagne a pris part aux travaux du premier syndicat, c'est à dire de septembre 1956 à septembre 1957, par les experts de I'Atomic Energy Authority.

La France avait soutenu l'affaire dès le départ, et avec moins de scepticisme que M. Sousselier n'a laissé entendre, ou du moins ce scepticisme a diminué avec le temps. Elle a contribué à l'élaboration du projet initial par le syndicat d'étude; elle a décidé de participer à la Société, ce qui n'était pas à l'époque une décision évidente. La création Jécidée, le CEA a mis les informations techniques qu'il déte­ nait à la disposition de la Société pour un dollar symbolique.

Restait une question délicate: C'était de savoir dans quel cadre l'affaire serait constituée. Ceux qui participaient à l'époque à la négociation d'Euratom à Val Duchesse trouvaient qu'une usine de retraitement ne ferait pas mal dans la corbeil­ le de la nouvelle institution. Pourtant, c'est dans le cadre de l'OECE que l'Euro- chemic a été constituée, d'abord à cause de la participation de l'ensemble des pays de l'organisation, et peut-être que le suspense qui a été soutenu pendant quelque temps sur une éventuelle participation de la Grande Bretagne nous a aidés, mais aussi parce que l'avance prise par le syndicat d'étude dans la mise au point du projet a contribué à cette décision. En somme, nous avions trouvé le mouvement en marchant.

C'est donc le travail du syndicat d'étude qui nous a mis le pied à l'étric, et parmi les membres de ce syndicat, dont M. Pohiand avait été élu président, je trouve quelques noms de participants de la réunion d'aujourd'hui: Sousselier, Ba- rendregt, Rometsch.

Parti de l'idée d'une usine de 500 t/an correspondant à un investissement de 35 millions de dollars, nous avions dit: Plus 25% si on voulait que l'usine soit conçue pour traiter des types de combustibles très divers. On a abouti à un projet plus modeste dans sa taille, une usine de 100 t/an, avec un investissement beaucoup plus modeste, à la suite d'une nouvelle situation, que certains ont considéré comme un peu artificielle.

Le déficit des premières années avait été chiffré à 7 millions de dollars, ce qui a conduit à fixer le capital initial à 20 millions. Le syndicat d'étude proposait 22 millions; les diplomates et financiers ont fait, ce qui est normal, une réduction de l'ordre de 10%. C'est sur ces bases que l'accord créant la société Eurochemic 3

a été signé le 20 décembre 1957, ce qui nous amène à la deuxième phase de l'his­ toire:

2. La construction des installations (1957-66)

On a entamé cette deuxième phase sans perdre de temps. Ce qui nous paraissait important, c'était de ne pas interrompre les travaux commencés depuis 1956 et de maintenir le mouvement créé. Si la décision du Conseil instituant l'Agence était im­ médiatement applicable - elle entrait en vigueur le 1er février 1958 - l'accord créant l'Eurochemic devait être ratifié, et dans la plupart des pays cette ratifica­ tion était subordonnée à des procédures parlementaires. On avait prévu que l'entrée en vigueur de la Convention supposait la ratification par les pays signataires et par d'autres états représentant au total 80% du capital. Il a fallu pour cela 18 mois. Et c'est le 27 juillet 1959 que la Convention est entrée en vigueur. Et pour que les études ne soient pas arrêtées entretemps, nous avions proposé au Conseil de maintenir le syndicat d'étude existant en le transformant dans sa structure, avec un mandat précis, c'est à dire d'établir un projet détaillé et de préparer les appels d'offres à l'industrie. Il n'avait qu'un budget de 500.000 dollars et partit sur la base de la répartition du capital. C'est ce qui a permis de créer un bureau d'études et de recherches au CEN de Mol, chargé d'évaluer le projet et de faire les recherches nécessaires à la mise au point du procédé.

Grâce à ce système, en mai 1960, par conséquent moins d'un an après l'entrée en vigueur de la Convention, le conseil d'administration d'Eurochemic approuvait les grandes lignes de l'avant-projet de l'usine et du laboratoire, ce qui a permis de commencer aussi les différents travaux.

Le site a été inauguré le 7 juillet 1960, et un avant-projet détaillé a été approuvé par le conseil d'administration le 13 juin 1961. Grâce à ces mesures, la construc­ tion a duré un peu moins de cinq ans, ce qui supporte vaillament la comparaison avec d'autres expériences analogues à cette époque et plus récemment.

L'inauguration de l'usine a eu lieu le 7 juillet 1966. Sur les spécifications de l'in­ stallation, le montage industriel, le progrès technologique que représente cette af­ faire, je peux passer rapidement. Je laisse le soin à MM, Barendregt et Rometsch de développer ces aspects qu'ils connaissent, Dieu merci, mieux que moi.

Mais dès 1961, il est apparu que les estimations initiales seraient dépassées, ou plutôt que le coût des investissements atteindrait le montant qui avait été initiale­ ment annoncé par le syndicat d'étude. Les négociation? entreprises ont conduit en mars 1962 et en juillet 1964 à des augmentât ions du capital, qui ont porté celui- ci à peu près au montant de 35 millions de dollars initialement annoncés. Il y a 4

trois pays qui n'ont pas souscrit à cette augmentation du capital: l'Italie, le Por­ tugal et la Turquie. Et ceci nous amène à la troisième phase de notre affaire:

3. L'exploitation de l'usine (1964-74)

Dès ia fin de 1964 ont été conclus les premiers contrats de retraitement, suivis de l'arrivée des premières tonnes de combustibles irradiés dans la piscine de stockage. Ceci était possible, parce que cette troisième phase de l'opération avait été prépa­ rée pendant la période précédente: La prospection commerciale avait commencé, les grandes lignes des contrats avaient été fixées, la politique tarifaire avait été dé­ finie, et des négociations avaient été entreprises avec les Etats-Unis pour permettre le retraitement dans l'usine de combustibles d'origine américaine, ce qui posait des problèmes juridiques épineux en l'absence d'accord bilatéral entre l'Agence et les Etats-Unis. L'exploitation avait donc pu commencer avant même l'achèvement de I'usine.

Celle-ci avait deux buts: d'une pari de permettre le retraitement des combustibles de type très divers provenant de réacteurs exploités en Europe en attendant la con­ struction de grandes unités, et d'autre part de fournir aux pays européens l'expé­ rience technique et économique en leur permettant de passer le moment venu à l'échelle industrielle.

Le moment venu, on estimait, en début des années 60, que la construction de grandes unités - on parlait d'usines de l'ordre de 1.000 t/an - ne serait pas jus­ tifiée compte tenu du ralentissement des programmes nucléaires qui avaient été défi­ nies au milieu des années 50. Dans I'interval, Eurochemic avait donc une double fonction: d'usine de production et d'installation pilote.

Je crois que tous se sont mis d'accord pour dire que sur ces deux points Euroche­ mic a été un succès technique et a rempli son contrat. Nous verrons demain quels ont été les problèmes d'exploitation résultant de la diversité des combustibles à traiter, nous verrons quels ont été les incidents de parcours d'ailleurs assez petits et il faut que nous nous rappellions qu'il y a eu un moment où l'Eurochemic était la seule usine en exploitation dans le monde pour retraiter des combustibles à oxides d'uranium.

Dans la suite de nos travaux, nous verrons aussi quel a été le rôle joué par euro­ chemic dans le développement de la technologie, dans sa diffusion dans les pays membres, mais il faut que nous nous rappellions aussi que c'est ici que l'industrie chimique des principaux pays européens a fait ses premières armes dans notre do­ maine, et que c'est ici que se sont formés les plus brillants spécialistes de la chi­ mie nucléaire en Europe. 5

Les véritables problèmes à cette époque n'ont pas été d'ordro technique, ils ont été d'ordre commercial. Us étaient dus au retard des programmes nucléaires en Eu­ rope, à la réduction des quantités de combustibles à retraiter par rapport aux pre­ visions initiales. On estimait qu'ils n'atteindraient même pas 200 kg/an à la mi- 70.

En l'absence de tout engagement des pays participants de faire retraiter leurs com­ bustibles à Eurochemic, et à défaut d'un accord avec I'Atomic Energy Authority, la Société se trouvait devant une concurrence qui a été aggravée par la surcapa­ cité provenant de la mise en service de nouvelles installations pouvant traiter des éléments à oxide d'uranium: Windscale d'abord, La Hague par la suite. T'-JÙ résul­ tait nécessairement un prix de retraitement qui est même tombé en dessous de ce qui était considéré comme le prix du marché de 20 dollar le kilo.

La conséquence de ceci a été que le déficit d'exploitation n'a pas été éliminé les premières annés comme on le pensait d'abord, qu'il est devenu chronique et les pays participants se sont retrouvés dans une négociations financière quasi perma­ nente pour couvrir ce déficit.

Un accord est intervenu en 1964 pour régler la situation sur la base o:un program­ me de quatre ans (1964-67). En 1967, un nouvel accord a permi de régler la situa­ tion pour les deux années suivantes. En 1969, un nouveau programme de finance­ ment pour une période de cinq ans a été élaboré. Et dès 1970, il apparaissait que des déficits plus importants que prévus se produira'ent et surtout qu'ils subsiste­ raient au delà de 1974.

C'est cett situation commerciale e' ses conséquences financières qui ont engendré la décision prise par le conseil d'administration d'abord en novembre 1971, puis en mars 1972, de réduire progressivement l'exploitation et de l'arrêter à la mi-74.

Pour être complet, il faut dire que cette décision a aussi eu des motifs politiques. La création annoncée en octobre 1971 par l'Allemagne, la France et le Royaume Uni de constituer le groupement United Reprocessors faisait disparaître toute perspective de réaliser en Europe une grande installation commune comme cela avait été initia­ lement prévu. Et nous arrivons à la quatrième phase, qui est celle dans laquelle nous sommes encore aujourd'hui:

4. La remise en état du site (1974-84)

Dès 1972, on avait procédé à l'analyse des conséquences techniques, financières et juridiques d'une fermeture éventuelle. Sur le plant technique, ii fallait se mettre d'accord sur les travaux nécfssités pour la décontamination de l'installation, le coridi t ionnomcnt et -? stockage dos déchets, et ul lérieurcment un démantèlement éven- 6

tuel de l'usine. Sur le plan juridique, deux problèmes se posaient: Il fallait trou­ ver une solution à la limitation de la durée de la Société, créée initialement pour 15 ans et qui par conséquent se terminait au 27 juillet 1974. Jn pays n'a pas par­ ticipé à la première prorogation de 5 ans et a demandé ce qu'on a appelé son "ticket de sortie", les Pays Bas. Sur le plan juridique aussi, il fallait préciser les obligations contractuelles de la Société, celles qui résultaient des contrats con­ clus aussi bien sur le plan commercial qu'avec le personnel de l'entreprise, et les obligation légales qui résultaient de la réglementation nucléaire de l'état du siège.

Une théorie ingénieuse a conduit à faire admettre aux états que si ces obligations contractuelles étaient des obligations de la Société, il incombait aux états de les prendre en charge. Et ceci nous amène aux problèmes financiers qui étaient comme toujours les plus difficiles, car s'il était malaisé d'obtenir un accord des pays membres pour leur faire participer aux charges d'exploitation d'une société en dif­ ficulté, il était plus difficile encore de leur faire admettre de prendre en charge les dépenses accrues de la fermeture.

La situation d'est trouvée clarifiée dans une large mesure par l'adoption, en dé­ cembre 1977, du projet de Convention entre Eurochemic et le Gouvernement de la Belgique, car cette Convention précisait les obligations d'Eurochemic et prévoyait le reprise des installations de la Société par la Belgique selon un calendrier déter­ miné. Elle a servi de base à la négociation sur le financement des dépenses incom­ bant à Eurochemic.

La Convention, adoptée par le Groupe Spécial en juillet 1978, a été signée en juil­ let 1978 et est entrée en vigueur le 30 octobre de la même année. Elle a conduit d'une part à proroger la durée de la Société jusqu'en juin 1982, et d'autre part à un ensemble de recommandations adressées aux pays membres, comportant entre autres des estimations de dépenses. Cette Convention a été mise en application: Les installations ont été transférées progressivement à la Belgique.

La Convention prévoyait que la Belgique assurerait les obligations en attendant la constitution de la nouvelle Société. Le délai nécessaire pour cette constitution a conduit à adapter les conditions d'application de la Convention par un Protocole d'Accord, qui a été signé le 17 décembre 1981 et à une nouvelle prorogation des activités de la Société, jusqu'au 31 décembre 1983.

Aujourd'hui, c'est sur ces bases que la Société est entrée en liquidation, depuis le 27 juillet 1982, qu'elle exécute les travaux qui lui incombent, et qu'elle assure, pour le compte de la Belgique, la gestion du site. Entretemps, un nouveau pas a été franchi par l'autorisation donnée récemment par le Parlement belge de repren­ dre l'exploitation. Toutefois, ceci n'a pas encore permis la constitution de la nou­ velle Société, puisque le Gouvernement belge a décidé que la remise en service de 7

l'usine ne serait décidée définitivement qu'après son accord. Et cet accord dépen­ dra de l'issue de deux études en cours, une sur les coûts d'investissement et une sur les aspects de la sécurité.

On peut espérer que cela conduira à la poursuite de l'exploitation de l'usine, que la situation du personnel soit fixée et que cela permette le maintien dans son en­ semble d'une équipe qui a fait ses preuves et que les obligations financières des pays soient clarifiées et plus nettement définies et qu'un arrangement intervienne avec nos amis belges pour éviter la poursuite des activités d'Eurochemic au delà d'un délai raisonnable.

Si cette dernière étape est franchie dans de bonnes conditions, nous pourrons consi­ dérer que notre expérience commune à travers ses phases successives - construction, exploitation, liquidation - a produit des résultats positifs. Et je pense que la suite de notre séminaire le montrera plus clairement et d'une façon plus détaillée.

9

L'EXPERIENCE D'EUROCHEMIC EN CE QUI CONCERNE LES ASPECTS INSTITUTIONNELS DE LA COOPERATION INTERNATIONALE EN MATIERE SCIENTIFIQUE ET TECHNIQUE

P. Strohl S

Dans le temps très court qui m'est imparti, il est très difficile de tirer les leçons de I experience acquise par Eurochemic du point de vue de son statut juridique et des problèmes de ses structures et de son financement, et je me bornerai à une très rapide synthèse de cette expérience de son point de vue institutionnel, c'est-à-dire des problèmes liés au statut juridique, à la gestion, au financement.

Pour faire cette synthèse, je crois qu'il faut partir d'un rappel des données ini­ tiales. En effet, la plupart des solutions qui ont été adoptées pour les problèmes institutionnels d'Eurochemic ont été imposées par les conditions de création et les intentions des fondateurs relatives aux objectifs à atteindre. Et à cet égard, je rappellerai quatre données qui me paraissent essentielles.

1. Les données initiales

La première donnée, qui a été déjà mentionnée par M. Huet, c'est la double mission d'Eurochemic:

mission de recherche et de développement pour acquérir la technologie et l'expérience industrielle du retraitement chimique, de formation du personnel; et mission de fourniture d'un service de caractère industriel, si possible dans des conditions industrielles.

Cette double mission elle-même a créé un problème difficile aux juristes qui ont été appelés à concevoir une structure juridique et un mode de financement conve­ nant à la fois à un centre de recherche et à une entreprise industrielle. On pou­ vait décider entre un statut d'organisme public, propre à un centre de recherche, comme par exemple le CERN, ou bien un statut qui conviendrait mieux à une entre­ prise de caractère industrielle. Alors, entre ce statut d'organisme public et ce sta­ tut d'une société commerciale, je crois que la confiance dans l'avenir industriel du retraitement a influencé le choix dans le sens de la deuxième solution, celle d'une société de statut commercial.

La deuxième donnée qui est importante a trait à la coopération entre les gouverne- ments et l'industrie. Bien entendu, dans le domaine nucléaire les rapports entre 10

gouvernements et l'industrie ont une importance particulière, et encore plus parti­ culière en ce qui concerne le retraitement. Il fallait au départ une initiative et une aide gouvernementales pour s'engager dans ce domaine, mais on considérait également naturel que l'industrie prenne le relais, le moment venu, c'est-à-dire au moment où l'exploitation deviendrait rentable. Alors il était également admis par les fondateurs que même dans un avenir éloigné, au moment de l'exploitation industrielle, les orientations politiques devaient rester entre les mains des gouver­ nements, compte tenu des problèmes délicats que soulève le retraitement des combus­ tibles irradiés.

Il fallait donc une structure qui permette dans l'aveni>- une exploitation indus­ trielle, tout en gardant un contrôle gouvernemental sur l'ensemble de la politique générale. Une formule associant gouvernements et industrie également dans la struc­ ture de la gestion e! du financement. On pensait donc le plus naturellement à une société par actions, dont les actions pourraient être transférées dans des conditions déterminées, dont les actionnaires initiaux seraient des gouvernements ou des orga­ nismes publics, se réservant un certain contrôle sur l'évolution de la participation à la société, mais dont les actionnaires futurs seraient ou pourraient être des en­ treprises industrielles.

La troisième donnée importante, à laquelle on ne pense pas toujours, c'est que l'entreprise commune devait être créée à partir de rien. Compte tenu de la situation du retraitement et des intentions des fondateurs, on ne pouvait pas confier à un organisme national existant à cette époque la responsabilité d'accueillir le projet international et son fonctionnement pratique, comme c'était le cas pour le projet Halden ou pour le projet Dragon. Eurochemic partait de rien. Et je crois, que le moment ou cela se situait permet de comprendre très facilement pourquoi i I en a été ainsi .

Il fallait donc créer un organisme nouveau réalisant lui-même les installations né­ cessaires à son programme de coopération, et cette réalisation des installations était elle-même un des éléments essentiels du programme ri'expérience que l'on envi­ sageait .

Quatrième et dernière donnée initiale qui me paraît essentielle, c'est que dans l'esprit des fondateurs l'entreprise commune devait avoir un caractère international très marqué. Ceci est probablement lié à la mission scientifique d'Eurochemic. Chaque participant devait avoir le droit et la possibilité de bénéficier pleinement des connaissances et de l'expérience acquise, ainsi que des services de l'usine. Il fallait donc, que chaque participant puisse participer aux travaux, à la gestion et à la direction du programme. I! fallait constituer des équipes de travail inter­ nationales et avoir une gestion i rit< •< -i H t iona le. Ceci, il me semble, était lié à la miss'on d'acquérir en commun une expérience dn technologie nouvelle. 11

Ceci aussi conduisait à la création d'un organisme à statut international très mar­ qué, avec des garanties relatives aux mouvements du personnel, aux possibilités de transferts des équipements et des combustibles irradiés à trailer. On s'est rallié par conqéquent à un statut international comportant des immunités et des exonéra­ tions pour faciliter le fonctionnement de la société et garantir sa mission interna­ tionale. Ceci conduisait nécessairement aussi à la conclusion d'une convention di­ plomatique créant cet organisme et fixant les règles essentielles de son fonctionne­ ment.

2. La solution institutionnelle

En conclusion, ces données initiales ont conduit assez naturellement à la solution qui a été app »rtée, c'est-à-dire: une nouvelle société internationale par actions, dont le capital social initial serait entièrement souscrit par le secteur public, mais dont le capital serait transféré partiellement ou même totalement à des entreprises industrielles privées ou publiques, mais dont la politique générale resterait sous le contrôle des gouvernements.

Il n'y a aucune autre entreprise commune qui ait un statut aussi international qu'a eu Eurochemic. Il i'agit d'une solution juridique tout à fait originale en ma­ tière de coopération internationale de caractère scientifique et industriel. C'est dans ce domaine le seul exemple, même si certains autres organismes p'en rap­ prochent.

Il est intéressant de comparer cette formule d'Eurochemic avec celles qui avaient été utilisées dans d'autres exemples de coopération internationale dans le domaine nucléaire pour des activités opérationnelles.

On s'aperçoit que pour la plupart des autres projets internationaux on a, dans toute la mesure du possible, évité de créer de nouvelles structures juridiques ou même de réaliser de nouvelles installations en utilisant au maximum des capacités nationales. C'est le cas pour Dragon, Haiden, Stripa et toute une série d'autres projets. Je vous expliquait tout à l'heure pourquoi cette solution ne paraissait pas accessible aux fondateurs d'Eurochemic.

Un deuxième point: Dans la plupart des autres cas, lorsqu'on a créé de nouvelles entités juridiques au lieu d'utiliser des organismes nationaux existants, on a créé en général des sociétés de droit national, une ou plusieurs par projet. C'est le cas d'Eurodif, d'Urenco en de Nersa dans le domaine des réacteurs rapides.

Dans le cas d'Urenco, on a créé plusieurs sociétés diverses selon la fonction, car dans le groupe d'Urenco une société est chargée de la commercialisation, une autre 12

de la recherche et du développement, et d'autres de l'exploitation. On peut se de­ mander en fait si dans le cas d'Eurochemic on n'aurait pas pu créer deux sociétés, deux organismes associés l'un à l'autre pour tenir compte de la double mission d'Eurochemic.

Toutes ces formules utilisées pour d'autres projets internationaux n'ont pas empêché la coopération internationale, la participation de plusieurs pays à des travaux, au financement des travaux e! même à des équipes internationales, et dans aucun C£.s on ne trouve un caractère aussi international, aussi bien dans la composition de la direction, que dans la gestion et l'exploitation et dans le statut juridique, que dans le cas d'Eurochemic.

3. L'épreuve de la réalité

Pour terminer, on peut se demander dans quelle mesure les solutions juridiques qui ont été retenues ont surmonté les épreuves de la réalité et dans quelle mesure elles ont pu y faire face. Il est difficile de dire si le caractère très international d'Eurochemic a été un avantage, ou si au contraire il a provoqué des difficultés excessives.

Ce caractère international a certainement contribué au plein succès d'une des mis­ sions d'Eurochemic, c'est-à-dire la diffusion des connaissances, l'acquisition en commun de la technologie du retraitement, et surtout de l'expérience pratique dans ce domaine.

Pour la deuxième mission, celle de service industriel et même d'exploitation indus­ trielle, l'échec relatif est dû aux conditions du marché du retraitement et à la po­ litique des pays membres dans ce domaine.

Sur le premier point de cet échec, les aspects commerciaux, le résultat peut laisser penser que la structure juridique n'a pas été adaptée à la réalité. Elle a fonction­ né de manière un peu artificielle et n'a pas aidé à résoudre certains problèmes, comme par exemple le problème du financement supplémentaire. Elle a aussi rendu difficile l'élimination des participants qui n'acceptaient pas les mêmes obligations que les autres et elle n'a pas permis, je crois, de donner la complète priorité à la gestion technique sur des considérations d'ordre politique.

En réalité, aucune formule juridique n'aurait permis de surmonter les difficultés liées au marché du retraitement. Avec l'expérience acquise, on peut cependant se demander si ce n'aurait pas été souhaitable de prendre un certain nombre de pré­ cautions au départ, comme par fxrmple une disposition qui aurait garanti à l'Eurochemic l'exclusivité des contrats dp retraitement de la part des actionnaires, 13

et une disposition protégeant Eurochemic contre la concurrence de ses propres ac­ tionnaires, ce qui existe dans le cas d'Urenco. L'exemple d'Urenco, quelques an­ nées p>us tard, aurait pu être utilisé dans le cadre d'Eurochemic, sur ce point en tout cas.

Sur le deuxième point de cet échec, la politique des pays membres en matière de retraitement, il faut reconnaître qu'Eurochemic s'est retrouvée isolée. Je crois qu'une des leçons essentielles à t:.-er à cet égard, c'est que pour qu'une entreprise commune purement technique réussisse, il faut qu'elle soit l'instrument d'une poli­ tique commune à long terme des pays qui y participent. Le n'était pas l~ cas, ni puur Eurochemic, ni pour Dragon, et cela n'a pas été possible pour celui du dé­ veloppement des réacteurs à haute température. A cet égard, l'AEN n'a pas pu jouer son rôle naturel, c'est-à-dire dégager u-.t politique commune stable et à long terme qui aurait assuré l'avenir d'Eurochemic, compte tenu de son succès techni­ que.

Ceci étant dit, je crois qu'Eurochemic constitue une source d'expérience pour l'ave­ nir de la coopération internationale. Je pense que d'autres entreprises pourront être créées, probablement dans des domaines différents, peut-être celui de la gestion des déchets radioactifs, et peut-être que ces entreprises communes ne se limiteront pas à une participation purement européenne -.omme cela a été le cas jusqu'à pré­ sent. Je suis persuadé qu'Eurochemic pourra aider les générations futures à mieux coopérer entres elles, si elles en ont l'intention.

15

EUROCHEMIC AND THE LAW OF THE HOST COUNTRY

O. von Busekist

After the excursions into the past and into the fields of international cooper<on presented by the eminent previous speakers, I propos»- to treat a more down-to- earth subject. The title of my speech seems to suggest a rather dull subject, but I can assure you that it covers a number of interesting questions with which Euro- chemic had and still has to struggle in its day-to-day management. I shall deal with such fascinating questions as: Is Eurochemic a Belgian company, or am I e1- lowed to address you in English, or should I rather give my speech in the Out».h language ?

Before delving into the ramifications of Belgian law, I should like to point out that I am of course a greenhorn compared to the previous speakers as well as compared to most of the members of this audience. My distinguished predecessor in the office of the secretary of the Board of Directors, Mr. Pierre Strohl, did not fail to point out the fact that I am a very young secretary when I dared to describe the history of the Board of Directors at its last meeting on June 30, 1982. Mr. Strohl is of course right: I was not involved as he was from the very beginning in the history of this European adventure which you may call the ecstasy and the agony, and my knowledge of Eurochemic's splendid past, at least until 1978, is based on printed paper rather than on practical experience. But coming back to the question of youth alluded to by Mr. Strohl, I have done a little private research and have found out that Mr. Strohl was appointed secretary of Eurochemic's Board of Direc­ tors at the tender age of 34 years while I assumed this burdensome task at the mature age of 42 years.

The Convention on the Constitution of Eurochemic and the Statute

Article 2(a) of the Convention on the constitution of Eurochemic provides the follow­ ing: "The Company shall be governed by the present Convention, by the Statute and, residual ly, by the law of Ihe Slate in which its headquarters are situated, in so far as the present Convention or the Statute do not derogate therefrom."

An identical provision is contnined in Article I of Eurochemic's Statute. This sounds to be a very good principle which firrcDonds to the internat ional character of the Company which is evoked in Ihe prcirnh I e tn the Convention (1). In f HC t , Euroche- 16

mic is different in this respect from the two other joint undertakings of the Nuclear Energy Agency the Halden and Dragon projects, which both were subject to the re­ levant laws and regulations of the respective host countries; this resulted from the fact that these two projects were set up without creating an independent legal per­ sonality (2). A provision similar to Article 2(a) of the Eurochemic Convention is to be found in Article 22 of the Statutes of the Joint European Torus (JET) (3). This article, entitled "Subsidiary reference to national law", provides that English law shall be applicable to any matter not covered by the JET Statutes but specifies also that the JET shall be regarded as a company within the meaning of the Eng­ lish legislation. On the other hand, the other joint undertakings created according to Articles 45 to 51 of the Euratom treaty are considered as purely national compa­ nies (4).

As a general rule, the application of national law to projects of international co­ operation tends to be the more extensive the more such projects involve technical or even industrial operations. The wide variety of the activities cannot be fully and exclusively governed by international law and the provisions of a treaty or statute. The question of the legislation applicable to international undertakings has recently been examined in the context of the establishment of regional nuclear fuel cycle centres (5) and possible international cooperation in the field of spent fuel management (6). The examples considered in the studies concerning the institutional aspects of cooperation show a variety of techniques used for achieving a reasonable balance between the application of national law and the provisions of the consti­ tuent instruments of the bodies concerned (7). Eurochemic and the other forms of international technical cooperation referred to differ by their more or less extensive reference to national law from international organisations proper, such as the OECD or the United Nations Organisation and its specialised agencies. The latter have concluded so-called headquarters agreements with the host state exempting the orga­ nisation from the local jurisdiction and granting extensive privileges and immuni­ ties to the organisation and its staff.

Returning to Article 2(a) of the Eurochemic Convention and Article 1 of its Statute, the question to what extent Belgian law is applicable to the Company can only be answered in the light of the provisions of the Convention and the Statute as Bel­ gian law is applicable only in a residual capacity. We shall see whether the ap­ plication of Belgian law is in practice residual only or whether it is rather the other way rouna, i.e. the Company is governed to a larger extent by Belgian law than by the provisions of the Convention and the Statute. To answer this question, I propose to examine a certain number of aspects such as the commercial law, the fiscal law, the labour and social legislation as well as - a Belgian speciality - the effects of the legislation on the use of the different languages of the country. 17

Commercial Law

According to the Convention and the Statute, Eurochemic is a joint undertaking of the 13 OECD/NEA countries. The term "joint undertaking" does not help us any fur­ ther in defining the legal nature of the Company as neither the Convention nor the Statute nor the NEA Statute contain a definition of that term, and that for good reasons: it would be contradictory to the principle of assuring the greatest possible flexibility in the form of international technical cooperation to try to fix some more or less elaborate legal framework for the constitution of joint undertakings. When further examining the Statute we find that Eurochemic has the form of a joint stock company, in French "société par actions", in German "Aktiengesel Ischaft", in Italian "société per azzioni" and in Dutch "maatschappij op aandelen". Both the French and the Dutch term do not correspond to internal Belgian legislation (8) which em­ ploys the term "société anonyme (SA)" and "naamloze vennootschap (NV)". As re­ gards its legal form, Eurochemic may thus be called an international company. That is indeed the term employed by the working party on the administrative and finan­ cial regime of joint undertakings dated March 8, 1957, which participated in the first report of the Steering Committee for Nuclear Energy to the OEEC Council (9). When examining the report of the working party (10), one finds that it had consi­ dered other legal forms, namely that of an international public establishment (établissement public international) and of a concession regime (régime de conces­ sion). With the exception of one member, the working group was in favour of con­ stituting an international company. This one member had expressed the fear that the commercial character thus given to the undertaking would not sufficiently take account of the public interest which should prevail in certain undertakings and of the fact that the latter might hardly work economically, at least in the first years. This member had therefore declared himself in favour of the international public establishment formula. This voice crying in the wilderness remained unheard and looking back we can only say that the man was right and that his fears were confirmed as early as 1961 as we shall see later.

Returning to the legal form of the Company, there are a number of provisions which deviate from Belgian law and which have been described in detail by Messrs Huet and Strohl in the French Yearbook of International Law in 1958 and 1961, respecti­ vely (11). I shall limit myself to summarizing the main features of the Company's structure that does not correspond to Belgian law.

First of all, Eurochemic was not constituted according to the norma' rules ap­ plicable to a Belgian "société anonyme" (12) but by the entry into force of an international Convention which entrained the entry into force of the annexed Statutes. While this underlined the autonomy and the international character of the Company as well as its independence from Belgian law, it had the disadvantage that amendments to the Statute were considered, by some participât ing countries 18

at least, to require parliamentary approval as these countries considered the Stat­ ute to be an integral part of the Convention.

While Eurochemic has a Board of Directors (Conseil d'administration) and a General Assembly (Assemblée générale) like a Belgian "société anonyme", it has in addition an international supervisory organ in the form of the Special Group of the NEA Steering Committee for Nuclear Energy which is composed of representatives of the participating governments. The Special Group has in particular to approve all im­ portant decisions related to the operation of the Company and to amendments to the Statute; these decisions require either unanimity or a qualified majority. In gener­ al, the Special Group considers any problems of common interest to the participating governments which may be raised by the operations of the Company and proposes the measures found necessary in that connection. With respect to the application of the law of the host country, Article 12(b) of the Convention on the constitution of Eurochemic provides that "if it subsequently appears that the legislative provi­ sions applied in the headquarters' state or in any other country taking part may give rise to difficulties in the operations carried out by the Company in pursuance of its objects, the Special Group shall propose measures for resolving such difficul­ ties in the spirit of the present Convention."

Eurochemic enjoys a certain number of privileges which are normally reserved to international organisations proper. For example, the installations and archives of the Company are inviolable, the installation and materials necessary for its activi­ ty may not be ceased or be subject to measures of enforced execution, and the Com­ pany may hire staff among the nationals of the countries taking part without being subject to immigration restrictions by the headquarters state, except when this would be contrary to public policy, national security or public health (13).

As regards the Company's liquidation, the provisions of the Statute were rather scarce so that the provisions of Belgian law are applicable to a large extent. In order to fix the number of liquidators and to determine their respective voting rights, the General Assembly, with the approval of the Special Group, amended Ar­ ticle 31 of the Statute. In fact, the application of' Belgian law would have led to a simple majority rule in the decisions of the Board of Liquidators which did not correspond to the voting rights in the previous Board of Directors and in the Gen­ eral Assembly which were determined by the number of shares and beneficiaries' shares held by the governments, public institutions or nationals represented by the liquidator in question.

As regards the Company's contractual relations with third parties, Belgian law was made applicable in most cases (in som'/ cases the ripplication of a foreign law was stipulated). In practice, the numerous contracts which the Company concluded during the study, design ;ind construction of its installations stipulated wherever 19

possible the application of Belgian lav». This is foreseen in the Company's general contract conditions for work and supplies as well as in the reprocessing contracts concluded by the Company.

The Fiscal Regime

Article 7 of the Convention on the Constitution of Eurochemic grants a certain num­ ber of derogations from Belgian law as regards public fees and taxes. In particu­ lar, the Company is exempt from fees and taxes payable upon the acquisition of immovable property, from direct taxes on its property assets and income as well as from any exceptional or discriminatory taxes; these exceptions do not apply however to any fee or tax charged in respect of any public utilities service. The Steering Committee's working party on the administrative and financial regime of joint undertakings referred to above, stated in its report that "such privileges as are granted to the undertaking must not be so granted without a real necessity and must not be carried to excess. The normal purpose of privileges must be to offset such disadvantages as might be caused to the undertaking on account of its inter­ national character and not to grant it the financial advantage which might distort normal competition" (14).

The fiscal regime was established on the basis of this report in 1957, and the point o' view expressed by the working group reflected the then existing expectation that the development of nuclear energy would lead to putting into service industrial re­ processing plants within the next years. As already mentioned by Mr. Huet, these perspectives changed completely in the following years, and the argument of pre­ venting the distortion of normal competition with private industry became totally unfounded.

It became soon apparent that Eurochemic had to be conceived as a centre of common experience or as some sort of European laboratory rather than as a company enter­ ing into competition with private industry. The taxes to which Eurochemic remained subjected despite the above mentioned exonerations constituted a considerable finan­ cial charge for the Company. On the basis of the estimates made in 1960 for the costs of constructing the plant, the laboratory and the annexed installation, the indirect taxes applicable in Belgium (turnover tax, building tax, transport tax and duties) amounted to 1.2 M$. The direct taxes on the salary of the personnel were estimated at 100,000 $ per year. For the initial period of 5 years corresponding to the construction and startup of the plant, the'total taxes would exceed 1.5 M$ or about 7% of the Company's capital.

At the request of the Board of Directors,' the question was submitted to the Special Group according to Article 12(a) cited above. One solution discussed would have consisted of amending the Convention and to confer upon the Company a fiscal re- 20

gime comparable to that of CERN, at least for a period necessary to construct the installation. Given the complications and delay which would have resulted from the signature and the ratification of a Protocol amending the Convention, it was pro­ posed to the Special Group to ask the host government to adopt certain exemptions which would take account of the international character of the Company (15). The question was extensively discussed in the meeting of the Special Group on June 1 , 1960. While most representatives were in favour of a solution exempting Eurochemic from the taxes referred to above, the Belgian delegate abstained indicating that legislative measures appeared to be necessary to satisfy Eurochemic's request; as practical solution he could envisage a participation by Euratom in the Company, either directly as a member, or by means of research contracts concluded with the Company. The director general of NEA established unofficial contacts with Euratom which however did not lead to the proposed participation. Looking back, one might say fortunately so as, at least in the case of direct participation of Euratom, com­ plications would most probably have arisen due 'o the "double membership" of Eura­ tom members in Eurochemic. The example of Dragon illustrates this point.

The question of exonerating Eurochemic from the above taxes was not taken up again as a general rule. However, the Special Group adopted an interpretation of Article 8(a) of the Eurochemic Convention concerning the temporary import of equip­ ment for the construction of the plant, and the Belgian government made a special contribution when the capital was increased for the second time in 1963 (Article 4ter of the Statute) when it subscribed to 36 shares, i.e. an amount which was higher than the one which would have resulted from the application of the reparti­ tion formula for the other participating co'jniiries. This special effort by the host country corresponded, according to the Belgian authorities, to an exceptional con­ tribution to the Company's investment costs to be added to the operating expenses. At the Special Group meeting of May 10, 1963, the delegate for France, Mr. de Chocqueuse, made the shocking remark that this additional contribution was largely offset by the taxes levied by Belgium in connection with the construction of the plant.

The Language Problem

Contrary to the instruments of certain international organisations, neither the Con­ vention nor the Statute contain a word about the official or working languages of the Company, the authentic languages of the Convention (Article 21) being a differ­ ent matter. Since its inception, the Company has used English and French as work­ ing languages, both for practical reasons and taking into account the provisions applicable to ENEA which established Eurochemic as a joint undertaking. In parti­ cular, both languages were used -- and are still used - for the papers and pro­ ceedings of the Board of Directors and the General Assembly and also in dealings with administrative services in the headquarters state. This policy did not pose 21

practical problems, in particular in the dealings with the Belgian authorities; the health authorities even preferred to work from the original documents in English or French in order to avoid any risk of misunderstanding rather than from a Dutch translation. This peaceful atmosphere was disturbed when the Belgian Parliament, on August 3, 1963, adopted the law on the use of languages for administrative pur­ poses (16). This law prescribed that all dealings with the administrative authori­ ties had to be conducted in the language of the region where the operating head­ quarters of the company in question were situated. The application of this new re­ gulation to the Company created serious difficulties to the Company's staff, from top to bottom, who were fluent in so many languages, except in Dutch.

To illustrate these difficulties, I shall tell you the history of an incident which occurred on October 10, 1963. On this date, a wagon arrived from Munich in the Antwerp freight station, which contained machines and spare parts destined for Eurochemic. The required customs declaration had already been sent to the Antwerp station on October 8, 1963, in the English language. The customs officials could of course not decipher this strange language and returned the forms to Eurochemic with the remark "Nederlands a.u.b." which the competent Eurochemic services de­ coded as meaning "please submit the customs documents in the Dutch language". Eurochemic took the necessary steps to have the documents translated which took a couple of days, so that the goods could be cleared on October 20, 1963 only. The Belgian National Railway Company now sent the bill amounting to the astronomic sum of 2,575 BF as demurrage charge, i.e. the fees for the immobilisation of the wagon in the Antwerp station for a period of 10 days. Eurochemic refused to pay, invoking the international character of the Company and the fact that so far all customs documents had been made up in the English or French languages without any problems being caused by the customs authorities. Then followed a legal battle between the competent legal services of Eurochemic and the Belgian National Railway Company. This battle was continued before the court between attorneys engaged by the two companies, until finally Eurochemic gave in in 1965 and paid the principal sum, the court fees and the attorneys' fees amounting to some 9,000 BF.

Eurochemic's decision not to pursue this matter to the supreme court of Belgium was maybe influenced by the outcome of a discussion on an amendment to the Statute. As a matter of fact, the Management proposed in May 1964 to add a new paragraph to Article 33 of the Statute stipulating that all communications made between the national, provincial or municipal Belgian administrations and Eurochemic should be made in either English or French. By virtue of Article 2 of the Convention cited above, this clause would have derogated from Belgian legislation which is applica­ ble in a residual capacity only. When this proposal was submitted to the Board of Directors, the Belgian representative threw up his hands and said that such an amendment would have to be approved by the Belgian Parliament and that the Ma­ nagement's proposal was ill-timed for it ran the risk of raising political difficul- 22

ties just when Parliament was due to consider the question of financing the Com­ pany. After a lengthy discussion about the pros and conb of such an amendment, the item was finally dropped from the agenda of the following General Assembly and the Management was requested to approach the Belgian authorities to find a practi­ cal solution.

Such practical solutions were in fact found. Communications with the local and pro­ vincial authorities (e.g. building permits) are made in Dutch, while the language employed in contacts with the control authorities is determined by a pragmatic ap­ proach: If the chairman of a given committee or contact group is French speaking for example, he receives letters in French and the summary records of the meetings are established in French. However, as regards highly official documents, such as Eurochemic's licence and its extensions for the modification of the spent fuel stor­ age pond (building 2) and for the Pamela workshop, were issued in the form of a Royal Order in the Dutch language. The official texts of the 1978 Convention con­ cluded between Eurochemic and the Belgian government are Dutch and French. As a general rule, the excitements following the language law of 1963 gave way to more realistic approaches. In the beginning of 1966, a Flemish cultural group ad­ dressed a letter to the Minister for Foreign Affairs protesting against Eurochemic's lacking respect in respect of the Flemish region by sending out the invitations to tender to Flemish undertakings in French and requesting a reply in the same lan­ guage or in English. In the meantime, hard economic tacts have turned out to be stranger than cultural principles. With very few exceptions, Eurochemic sends out all technical documents annexed to such invitations in either French or English (the latter having the advantage of being a "neutral" language in Belgium), and no economic pressure group in Flanders has ever protested against this practice - they might even accept documents in Chinese to be awarded the contract.

The proposed amendment to Article 33 would not have prevented the application of the Dutch language as language to be used in the relations between employer and employee. On July 19, 1973, the Cultural Council of the Dutch Speaking Cultural Community adopted an order prescribing Dutch as the language to be used in the social relations between employer and employees as well as for the acts and docu­ ments of the undertakings prescribed by law (17). This order provides that all do­ cuments or acts contrary to the provisions of the order arc null and void and that the employer not obeying those provisions can be penalised.

Eurochemic follows those rules: all letters of engagement and dismissal are written in Dutch and so are all communications to the personnel, the collective labour agreements, the records of the works council and of the syndical delegation. Mow- ever, there is still some international spirit alive in the Company, and the trade unions have nat opposed themselves to these documents being translated into French 23

or English for the benefit of the some 50 foreign staff members still working at Eurohemic. Moreover, the right to use English and French as languages of the Board and the General Assembly was so far not yet put into doubt. That is also the reason why I was audacious enough to address you today in the English lan­ guage.

Labour Relations

Contrary to the staff of international organisations who are subject to special regu­ lations referred to in the constituant instruments of such organisations and adopt­ ed by their competent organs, Eurochemic's personnel is subject to Belgian labour and social law. The Convention does not define the Statute of the personnel and limits itself to provide for some facilities for personnel recruited abroad, such as the duty free import of their furniture and personal effects. In particular, Euroche­ mic staff members do not enjoy any exemption from taxation in respect of their sa­ laries and emoluments such as, for example, the OECD officials (18). This has given some rise to difficulty as regards the tax exemption on the so-called expa­ triation allowance which the Company paid tax free until being pursued by the Bel­ gian tax authorities.

From the very beginning it was recognized that the Company must regulate the staff conditions in accordance with Belgian law, and all employment contracts specify that the engagement is subject to the laws and custom prevailing in Belgium. Nevertheless, as early as 1959, the Board of Directors decided to adopt special staff rules to take account of the Company's international character and to enable it to recruit qualified technicians from all participating countries and to retain their services for a sufficient length of time. That is why the staff rulles (which were amended in 1963) contain a certain number of advantages applicable to internation­ ally recruited staff, such as the expatriation allowance, the reimbursement of re­ moval costs as well as of travel expenses upon recruitment and departure, and the payment of travel expenses in respect of home leave every two years. All these be­ nefits were more or less modelled after the regulations in force at the then OEEC. This is also true for the provident fund established by the Company.

The original staff rules concerning dismissal were well in conformity with Belgian law, but they were not adapted to take account of later modifications of the Bel­ gian legislation. The notice periods or corresponding dismissal indemnities accorded to employees by Belgian law and jurisprudence are considerable, and the Manage­ ment had quite some difficulties to convince the Board members that Eurochemic was not an international organisation which could freely set limits to such notices or indemnities (19). In addition, all the provisions of Belgian law concerning the closing of enterprises and collective dismissal as well as the takeover of personnel by another company or body - questions which have to br settled in the near fu- 24

ture as you all know - are applicable to Eurochemic and its personnel. If the Com­ pany does not respect these provisions, it will be exposed to legal proceedings as it is not immune from Belgian jurisdiction like international organisations proper.

The Company's amended staff rules foresaw a conciliation procedure in case of dis­ pute between staff members and the Company which included the participation of staff representatives. However, the Company did not establish a body representing the personnel to ensure a liaison with the Management, such as a staff association, until 1965. At that time, the pressure of the staff to establish a works council (conseil d'entreprise) according to Belgian law (20) had become more and more ur­ gent so that the Management agreed to set up a personnel committee the members of which were elected according to a rather complicated procedure. The personnel committee (later a committee of the managing personnel was also formed) did not correspond to the works council regulations according to Belgian law, in particular as it did not comprise representatives of the Management.

The Company did not, despite the revendications of the personnel, form a committee of safety, health and embellishment of the work premises prescribed by Belgian law (21). In 1971, a trade union brought a complaint against Eurochemic before the labour court which condemned Eurochemic by judgement of June 12, 1972 to establish that committee. Although Eurocherric, relying again on its international character, appealed from that judgement, the Company later established that committee as well as the works council according to Belgian legislation, the first elections for which were held in 1975. Since 1977, Eurochemic is also endowed with a trade union dele­ gation.

The Company is also subject to the Belgian regulations concerning the salary ad­ justments to the consumer price index. More recently, a Royal Order (22) was pass­ ed obliging employers to either conclude collective labour agreements providing for both a reduction of the working time by at least 5% and additional recruitment of 3% of the actual staff, or to pay a contribution to an employment fund. The person­ nel, whose salaries are only partly adjusted to the increase of the cost of living (the 8elgian Government has done away with the automatic wage indexation), urges the Management to conclude a collective labour agreement while the latter invokes the Company's character of an "international public service" to which the Order is not applicable.'

Conclusion

Returning to the original question of whether the application of Belgian law in the areas described before makes Eurochemic a Belgian company or whether it retains its international character because of the special features established by the Con­ vention and the Statute has been extensively discussed by Mr, Strohl (23). I would 25

agree with his conclusion that Article 2(a) of the Convention on the Constitution of Eurochemic stipulating the subsidiary application of Belgian law does not intend to solve this question but rather to establish a conflict of law rule: The nature of the legal acts rather than the nature of Eurochemic determines the applicable law. The JET Statute is more explicit in this respect, as Article 22.2 provides that "... for the avoidance of doubt the Joint Undertaking shall not be regarded as a company within the meaning of the Companies Act 1948 and 1967 of the United King­ dom."

That Eurochemic is an international company is beyond doubt, as otherwise we would not be gathering here to talk about its experience. A normal Belgian compa­ ny would long have been dissolved or gone bankrupt as the shareholders, not being able to agree on capital increases, would have liquidated the company as soon as the capital had been used up. The contrary has happened ai Ejrochemic. As you all know, the Company's operating expenses are financed since 1964 by contribu­ tions of the participating governments. The conclusion and entry into force of the Convention with the Belgian Government would not have been possible without the financial commitments made by those governments. The governments were convinced that they were responsible, according to principles of international law, for the financing of Eurochemic's legal obligations towards the host government.

But that is not all. Eurochemic escapes even all normal categories of national and international law: It has no site and no installations, but is still operator of a nuclear installation, it has no capital, but manages to pay its obligations, it is in liquidation but behaves as if nothing had happened, it has dismissed all its personnel in the beginning of the seventies, but actually employs more people than in 1975 when the plar.t was shut down, is has not yet a Belgian partner with whom to talk about the future, but remains an incorrigible optimist, and, finally, has hurt so many feelings in the past, but - as shown by the present meeting - has kept to so many friends.

Other Applicable Laws

It is of course possible to forget all attempts to find a legal definition of Euroche­ mic's nature and to examine to what extent it is subject to Belgian law. Perhaps it is more interesting to ask to which other laws the Company has been and still is subjected.

The law which immediately comes to mind in this context is ... MURPHY'S LAW. For those of you who do not yet know this fundamental principle which governs all as­ pects of our life, I shall briefly describe its origin. Most of you will remember the rocket sled tests carried out by the US Air Force to find out how many q the human body could withstand without hfirm. After on" of thorn- test runs, the test 26

pilot, major Stapp, stumbled out of the sled with bloodshot eyes and asked: How many g did I stand this time ? One of the technicians replied: Zero - at least the instruments did not show anything. What had happened ? Mr. Edward Aloysius Murphy, an engineer working at that time for the Air Force, had developed some sort of harness equipped with 16 sensors to measure the accelerative force to which the test pilot was exposed when the sled was rocketed to fill speed and then ab­ ruptly brought to a standstill in a water trench. Although there were only two pos­ sibilities to connect the sensors to the measuring instruments, all 16 sensors had been wrongly connected before that test run. It was then when Mr. Murphy coined the immortal phrase to be known as Murphy's Law: If anything can go wrong, it will.

Eurochemic was of course subject to that law, as well as to its numerous variations which in most cases were named after their inventors. I shall cite a few pertinent examples.

MCDONALD'S CORROLARY to Murphy's law stipulates that in any set of circumstances, the proper course of action is determined by subsequent events.

As regards the planning and construction of the plant, the Company was faced with pyramidal problems and, consequently, subject to CHEOP'S LAW: Whatever you build, it will be more expensive than calculated and be finished later than plan­ ned .

There is, fortunately, some consolation in STENDERUP'S LAW: The sooner you fall behind, the more time you will have to catch up.

Concerning persons and personnel, two variations of Murphy's law should be borne in mind: When a problem goes away, the people working to solve it do not. And: the one who says it cannot be done should never interrupt the one who is doing it.

There is ALLEN'S LAW, which is applicable to Eurochemic as well: Almost anything is easier to get into than to get out of.

FAHNESTOCK'S RULE FOR FAILURE has certainly not been observed by the Company as shown by the prosent seminar. This rule says: If at first you don't succeed, destroy all evidence that you ever tried.

The Belgian Government, which according to the Convention concluded with Euroche­ mic, is responsible for the decommissioning and dismantling of the plant, will be consoled by RUCNICKI'S RULE: That which cannot be taken apart will fall apart. 27

The people working for the Sybelpro Syndicate charged with the plant recommission- ing project will have problems to escape the application of WRIGHT'S FIRST LAW OF QUALITY: Quality is inversely proportional to the time left for completion of the project.

And finally, as everybody at Eurochemic is constantly talking about the future, let me conclude with FINNIGAN'S LAW: The farther away the future, the better it looks.

NOTES

(1) The third preambular paragraph reads: "Considering that this Company, both as regards its composition and its aims, has an international character and is in the general interest of the countries taking part."

(2) See the last preambular paragraph of the Agreement on the joint operation of the Halden Boiling Water Reactor of 11.6.1958, and Article 1(b) of the Revised Agree­ ment concerning the High-Temperature Gas-Cooled Reactor Project of November 19, 1962.

(3) Council Decision of 30.5.1978 on the establishment of the Joint European Torus (JET), Joint Undertaking (78/471 Euratom), Official Journal of the European Commu­ nities (OJ) No. L 151/10, June 7, 1978, reproduced in the Supplement to Nuclear Law Bul­ letin No. 22.

(4) Such as the Hochtemperatur-Kernkraftwerk GmbH (HKG) in Uentrop (OJ No. L 165/7 of 20.6.1974), the Société belgo-française d'énergie nucléaire mosane (SEMO) which exploits the Tihange-1 nuclear power station (OJ No. L 325/9 of 5.12.1974), and the Schnell-Briiter-Kernkraftwerksgesellschaft mbH (SBK) which constructs the Kalkar fast breeder (OJ No. L 152/8 of 12.6.1975).

(5) P. STROHL, Appraisal of Legal and Administrative Problems Concerning the Setting Up and Operation of Joint Projects in the Field of Energy R and D, Regional Nu­ clear Fuel Cycle Centres, Vol. II, IAEA, Vienna, 1977, p. 83.

(6) IAEA Expert Group on International Spent Fuel Management, Sub-Group B: Institutional, Legal and Procedural Considerations, Contribution to Task 2B, by P. STROHL.

(7) See Appendix II to the document cited in footnote 6 above.

(8) Lois coordonnées sur les sociétés commerciales.

(9) The European Nuclear Energy Agency anrl +-h^ Eurochenrc Company, 1st Report of the Steering Committee for Nuclear Energy to the O.E.E.C. Council, OEEC, Paris, 1958, p. 147.

(10) Document NE(57)12 of 8.3.1957.

(11) P. HUET, L'Agence Européenne pour l'Energie Nucléaire et la Société Euro­ chemic, AFDI, 1958, p. 512. P. STROHL, Problèmes juridiques soulevés par la constitution et le fonctionnement de la Société Eurochemic, AFDI, 1961, p. 569.

(12) Articles 29 to 40 of the "Lois coordonnées".

(13) Articles 6 and 10 of the Convention.

(14) Op. cit. footnote 9, p. MO. 28

(15) Document NE/EUR(60)3 of 20.5.1960.

(16) Loi du 2.8.1963 sur l'emploi des langues en matière administrative. Moni­ teur belge of 22.8.1963; actually, the matter is regulated by the "Lois sur l'emploi dss langues en matière administrative, cojrdonnées le 18 juillet 1966" (MB 2.8.1966), as amended.

(17) Décret du 19 juillet 1973 du Conseil culturel de la Communauté culturelle néerlandaise réglant l'emploi des langues en matière de relations sociales entre em­ ployeurs et travailleurs, ainsi qu'en matière d'actes et de documents d'entreprise pres­ crits par la loi et les règlements, MB 6.9.1973. A similar Decree of 30.6.1982 exists for the French community (MB of 27.8.1982), liable to cause atrocious conflicts, see E. CARLIER, Le décret d'août, J.T.T., 1982, p. 361.

(18) Article 14(b) of the Supplementary Protocol No. 1 to the Convention for European Economic Cooperation, made applicable by Article 19 of the OECD Convention, provides that "Officials of the Organisation shall enjoy the same exemption from taxation in respect of the salaries and emoluments paid to them as is enjoyed by offi­ cials of the principal international organisations and on the same conditions."

(19) The notice period (or equivalent payment) to be observed by the OECD Secretary-General is three or four months, according to the grade (Staff Instruction 111/2).

(20) Loi du 20 septembre 1948 portant organisation de l'économie (MB of 27-28 September 1948), as amended.

(21) Loi du 10 juin 1952 concernant la santé et la sécurité des travailleurs ainsi que la salubrité du travail et des lieux de travail (MB 19.6.1952), as amended.

(22) Arrêté royal no. 181 créant un Fonds en vue de l'utilisation de la modéra­ tion salariale complémentaire pour l'emploi, MB du 18.T.1983.

(23) 0p. cit. footnote 11, pp. 578, 590. 29

THE UNITED STATES - EUROCHEMIC ASSISTANCE PROGRAMME

E.M. Shank

Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen, fellow fanatics, today is a red letter day for me as I am very pleased to be here and to share some of my experience from Euro­ chemic. While it is a happy day, it was almost a sad day, as this more or less would celebrate the end of Eurochemic. Fortunately, Eurochemic II has a chance to be born. If you are wondering why I have addressed some of you as "fellow fana­ tics", I would like to recall a conversation I had with Teun Barendregt a few years ago (year 1 or 2 A.C.). We were both trying to make a living in the appli­ cation of nuclear energy. One evening, Teun said: "Boy, Earl, it surely is difficult to make a living in this business. You either have to be stupid or fanatic." I agreed, but said that it might even help if we were stupid fanatics. Now I think most of the audience today are pro nuclear and many of us could be put into one of these three categories. I will leave it up to each of you to categorize himself.

As we are just before the coffee break and I have a little laryngitis, I would like to mention my main conclusions first.

My first point is to complement the Belgian government in taking the action which has just recently been taken in assuming the responsibility for this facility. Not only does Eurochemic represent a substantial capital investment, but more impor­ tant, it represents a large storehouse of qualified people and information. Both of these could easily have been lost without the very positive actions taken by the Belgian government.

My second point is that the US - Eurochemic assistance programme established a very efficient information exchange procedure, which I believe was extremely bene­ ficial to both parties. While this exchange programme seems to have died, some at­ tempt could be made on both sides to reactivate it. This programme has permitted the accumulation in one location of a substantial quantity of highly qualified infor­ mation .

My third point is to issue a challenge to the new owners/operators to make the best use of what they now have and to take the necessary steps lo maintain the high quality of international participatief' ar») exchange programme developed during the Eurochemic project. 30

My fourth point is the success that is evident by the execution of this project, the successful operation of the plant and the demonstrated capability to decontaminate the entire facility to a very low level, all with a very heterogeneous group of in­ ternational people from the European community. This success has convinced me that the ideas developed many years ago by Mr. Spock, also a Belgian, for a united Europe is a possible reality.

My fifth point is that I was, and still am, continually impressed with the high quality of people that have been provided from the various countries to work to­ gether on the Eurochemic project. Nowhere can I remember ever having met a group of such qualified and competent people, both collectively and individually.

My sixth point covers quality assurance. Quality assurance, as we know it, was applied very early by Eurochemic. We learned many things, the main lesson for me was that having too many in-line control groups, each producing large quanti­ ties of paper, does not assure a high quality plant.

My last point is that each of us, in our own individual ways, are ambassadors of the country from which we come. As ambassadors, we have a responsibility to present the best picture of our country towards the others. If we each try to be successful ambassadors and to cooperate with other people, then international coope­ ration, still fraught with many problems, can lead to worthwhile productive acti­ vities.

And now, I'd like to summarize one of my own personal experiences.

The US - Eurochemic assistance programme was conceived in 1957, born in 1958 and will be laid to rest in 1983. In line with the US policy established by president Eisenhower to make US nuclear technology available for peaceful application, the U5AEC established an assistance programme with the initial Eurochemic study group. Original plans called for this cooperation to start during the study phase and con­ tinue for a few years during concept and pre-project engineering. It was later ex­ panded to cover the design, construction and startup phases, but still in a five to six years total time frame. The formal European Assistance Programme lasted for more than ten years and informally to the present time.

To cover all the experiences by the US participants and the benefits to the US nu­ clear programme during these ten plus years would require substantially more time than available. At one time, I had planned to write a book covering my own expe­ riences during the eleven years I was associated with Eurochemic. Perhaps, after I retire to the good lite here in Bflqium, I w i 11 find time to do so. 31

Today, I will try to summarize some of the more interesting experiences from the startup of the programme, through working with seventeen nationalities where the two official languages were not the mother language for most of us. Many of the experiences, with hindsight, are now humorous and none would be traded.

The US - Eurochemic Assistance Programme can also be called the US - European Mutual Assistance Programme. I believe we Americans, as a country and as indivi­ duals, received much in return for ou," small part in this effort. Eurochemic repre­ sents, to me, a shining example of what can be done by people of many nationali­ ties working together. If someone should ask me what is the most unforgettable pe­ riod in my life, my answer would be: It started in 1958, when I became associated with the Eurochemic study group, and will probably end on Saturday night [or Sun­ day morning), the 17th of June, 1983. Many times, during Eurochemic's infancy, we wondered if it would survive, but it did and grew to adulthood.

When did my experiences begin ? Officially in October 1958, when I was assigned as the US - Eurochemic coordinator as back-up to Ed Nicholson, the first US advis­ er. Practically, it could have been anyone of several other periods. It could have been:

September 1959, when the first study group visited the US. How many of that group are here today ? Emile Detilleux, Herman Moeken, Ozzie Jenne, Rudi Winck- ler, the four Eurochemic musketeers, shattered by Mike Lung and Peter Suter, the engineer's control group, and guided by Ed Nicholson.

Or November 1960, or was it 1961, when Teun Barendregt and Bob Sloat tried to visit several US sites. The weather was terrible, with blizzards from east to west. However, the two succeeded in reaching all objectives, albeit sometimes later than planned.

Or in May 1962, when I made my first visit outside the USA. Talk about a green Tennessee hillbilly, it stuck out from me like a beacon. My first Eurochemic contact in Europe was René Vermeulen, who picked me up at Zaventem. On the way to Mol, I asked how he had spotted me so easily. He said: "Mr. Shank, no prob­ lem. I just looked for the most confused and baffled looking person coming through the gate, and I knew it had to be you." It was also the first time I had seen more bicycles than cars on the road, and, you know, René missed them all !

It could also have started in July 1962, when we arrived as a family in Europe.

how can one cover, in a short tirnc, (he most unforgettable 25 year period in one's life ? My experiences have been so varied, so interesting rind so rewarding, that 32

I have never been sorry that we, the Shank family, accepted the two years' tempo­ rary assignment to Eurochemic. I could list hundreds of situations, some funny and some not so funny, which grew from communication difficulties. After all, we had two official languages, neither of which was the mother tongue for most of us. French was a totally unknown tongue to me. Fortunately, I was able to pick up the English language (for reading and understanding) rather quickly, but mine still had sometimes to be translated into understandable English.

Many of you remember Gesa Sequins, née Saatweber, who was Teun's secretary. Many years later, she told Ruthie and me that she didn't understand a word I said for the first several weeks, or was it years. I never was able to write English to the standards required in the 1960's at Eurochemic. So you'll find some Euro­ chemic reports whicn have been issued in an unofficial language.

How many of you remember the farewell drinks we had as people left ? You remem­ ber that the boss of the man leaving had to say a few kind words, even though he may have been glad to see the man go. Now, Eurochemic English is fantastic, and Emile's use of it always fascinated me. Emile was giving the farewell speach for someone and his closing statement was: "And whenever I passed his office, I could look in and see him hardly working."

Another example that ! encountered early was the use of the English word "even­ tually". What I didn't realize at the time is that the European equivalent of even­ tually means possibly, whereas the English use of the word is definitely. The defi­ nition of this word came up during one of the safety commission meetings. Now, two or three hours later, with reference to several large diet ionnaries, we were able to resolve this question.

All of our experiences did not stem from language or those directly connected to the Eurochemic plant. We were installed in a furnished Eurochemic appartment on the market here in Mol and we had the furniture used by the previous US technical adviser. What I did not know at the time was that the ove.i, which was gas, was not in the best working conditions. Also, I think, the people here did not realize that coming from Tennessee, most of our household energy consumption was based on electricity. If one is used to cooking with electricity, and then finds himself using gas, it is no wonder that it takes a little time to become used to the new form of energy. Add to this the fact that the pilot in the oven continually went out, but failed to shut off the supply of gas, and you can understand the concern that developed. I requested that something be done quickly about this oven, even suggesting that perhaps a new stove was in order. The reaction was positive, I believe, but the execution was extremely slow to the point that several months later I still did not have a satisfactory stove for use in the appartment. At this point, I threatened to move to a hotel and to invoice Eurochemic for the total living ex- 33

penses. I must say, that this developed a rather quick response, and I was grati­ fied to receive a telephone call from Marcel Yves himself, stating that a new stove should be purchased but, since it was Friday night, he said: "Now, Earl, does it really have to be bought today, or can it wait until next Monday morning ?"

Most of the time that I worked at Eurochemic, I worked very closely with the tech­ nical department, and consequently most of my experiences were in relationship with the engineering, construction and startup of the plant from the viewpoint of the technical department. If I recall more experiences from the technical department and with relationship to Teun Barendregt than other, I think this can be under­ standable. There was always a very interesting argument which developed between Teun and me, whenever I prepared my progress report for the US Atomic Energy Commission. I felt that I tended to be more realistic in evaluating delivery sche­ dules, etc. than that being presented officially by Eurochemic. This invariably led to heavy discussions between Teun and me, since Teun always had a chance to read my progress report before it was actually issued. We usually ended up solving our problems very simply by Teun saying: "Earl, you are a pessimist and I am the realist." And I said: "No Teun, I am sorry, I am the realist, you are the opti­ mist ."

I had to admit to Teun, however, that I had a few lucky breaks in my so-called realism. I remember one particular problem was the delivery of the two waste eva­ porators from Italy. I had come back from a visit there and I predicted that the evaporators would not be delivered for several months or so later than scheduled. While the evaporators were actually delivered within about one week of my predic­ tion, the reason they were so late in arriving was not due to !' e reasons that I had considered. The late delivery resulted rather from a customs strike at the Ita­ lian-Swiss border one day before the equipment reached that border. I remember Teun saying: "Now, Earl, how can I anticipate and plan for a strike of the cus­ toms ?" How does one answer that ? The truth is that I was just plain dumb lucky in my prediction, because there is no way to predict this type of problem.

We had a lot of fun in those days, but we also had a lot of problems. We more or less started the first quality assurance programme at Eurocheriic. Unfortunately, we made the same mistake then we are continuing to make today in that we ended up with far too many groups responsible for the same thing: Quality assurance and overlapping inspection responsibilities for Eurochemic were given to the supplier, to the engineering company, to the architect-engineering coordinator, to the con­ struction company, actually to Eurorhcmic people themselves and to an independent non-destructive testing group, hired by Eurochemic. Consequently, we did end up with some equipment delivered on •- ; . .ind actu.'illy installed, which were far infe­ rior to our requirements. I think fh i -, one of the more import.mt lessons of my own experience here in E uroc.hertii ' • 34

The high-level waste storage tanks, for example, were installed when we found that the weldings of the internal supports were not according to our requirements. This had to be repaired in place, which required entering into the 20 m3 tanks via a rather small manhole. We had to be very selective in choosing the people to make these repairs, because of the size of these manholes. We also had problems with our first cycle extraction columns. In making field X-rays, we discovered that the welding was apparently done without adequate backup gas. We ended up with a very extensive in-place repair on most of these columns. I relate these problems to point out that these experiences should have taught us that more paper does not necessarily produce better quality, but we have troubles understanding this, par­ ticularly in the nuclear fields. I should have invested money either in Xerox or in a paper company, or both.

To show how good quality assurance could work however, I will mention a very pleasant experience with one of the Eurochemic quality assurance people, Arie Inge- laar. Now, Arie and I spent several years climbing through just about every crook and cranny that exists in this Eurochemic plant. We looked at thousands of X-rays and we rubbed our hands over thousands of welds. Arie himself was an excellent welder and I can say that he really knew what he was doing. In these activities, we got to now the site manager of Entrepose, Mr. Durand, reasonably well. Mr. Durand only spoke French, and Arie and I spoke almost no French, but we were able to communicate with hand motions and so on. One of the best ways that we found to communicate with Mr. Durand, who is a real specialist when it comes to cheese and wine, was through his occasional wine party for some of his staff, which Arie and I were invited to several times. Now, maybe we didn't learn too much about construction and fabrication and the formalizing of our quality assuran­ ce activities with paper, but we sure did learn a lot about wine and cheese.

This reminds me of a visit that I had from my US boss, Mr. Culler, who I'm sure many of you know or remember. He came over in 1964 I think, and we had most of the rough concrete poured. I was still experiencing some difficulty in not seeing the progress that I wanted to see or I thought we should see. We were down in zone 7 of building 1 and I had been trying to bring Floyd into tie picture about problems we had with Î3 nationalities, with different languages and all the prob­ lems that it created, the different mentality between the North and the South, etc. And finally, Floyd stopped in the middle of zone 7, looked at me and said: "Earl, everything you say may be true, but I tell you that they have poured one hell of a lot of concrete together."

Of course, the experience of the Shank family was not limited only to the direct experiences in Eurochemic here. Wc hnd the experiences of the school, of the family adjusting to the different European cultures, the problems of trying to buy things, and so on. The first years were» r.ither difficult for us. Both of my girls werf put 35

into the European School. Their age put them into the secondary school, and be­ cause English was not a Common Market language at that time, they were forced to go into one of the other sections. Now, by the time you come to the secondary school, you are expected to converse freely in your riot her tongue. This obviously was not the case for Kathy and Becky, because their true "moedertaal" was Tennes- sean, which is a dialect of American, which in turn is a dialect of English, I have been told. However, with some special evening lessons in German and the per­ sonal interest of Mr. Lemmers, my children were able to actually complete the first year successfully. Also, since our two year assignment eventually turned into seven years, both of my children were able to successfully complete their US high school equivalent here in Europe.

Unfortunately, I could go on for a long time remembering incidents and other things that left a lasting impression on my mind. I am sure, however, that you are glad that my time is running out and I will be unable to do so. And before closing, I will just list a few of these points without further discussion, to show how varied the experiences at Eurochemic can be.

1. The problems we had with the air locks on startup.

2. The fumeless dissolution that was no longer fumeless because we lost the NaOH scrub to the dissolver off-gas scrubber Hunzinger.

3. The problem in tracking down the cross contamination of the one ICU by the one IBSP air-lift.

4. The small concerts given by Franz Marcus at Hans Asyee's home.

5. The long planning discussions with Mike Lung and the introduction, final­ ly, of critical path plannng to the project by Jörgen Jacobsen.

6. The many discussions on analytical problems with Wilhelm Heinz, Herman Moeken, Rolf Berg and others. What we did not recognize then was the developing love between Rolf and Maria.

7. The long discussions on criticality, accountability and shielding with Walter Schüller, Italo Benfenati, Hans Zünd, Wolfgang Frenzel, Fred Oszuszky and Georg Herrmann,

8. The R&D work with Hubert Eschrich, André Redon, Raf dewitte and Jör­ gen Klitgaard.

9. Instrumentation problems and in-line sampling development with Alain Mongon and his group.

10. Startup operation with Silvio Cao and later continued operation with Bo Gust afsiion.

1!, The discussions on fuel reception and waste management with Franz Mar­ cus, Sven Thorslensen and Dieter Herbrechter. 36

12. The annual Eurochemic parties which usually didn't break up before 5 or 6 in the morning.

13. And the even longer Scandinavian parties, which were celebrated when one of the Scandinavian people returned to their home land. In particular we re­ member the parties from Bo Gustafsson and our inability to stay up with the Scan­ dinavians.

14. The many misstatements that I have made in using my version of the French language.

15. The all night decision meetings with Teun, Lars Nöjd and others.

You can see, that the experiences that one can gain at an international cooperation such as Eurochemic can be very interesting and rewarding. I wish to close only by repeating one of my first comments. I am very happy that the Belgian govern­ ment has choosen to keep Eurochemic alive and hope that they will succeed in re­ activating the plant, so that the high quality of international personnel, informa­ tion and cooperation can be maintained. 37

CONSTRUCTION ANb STARTUP OF THE REPROCESSING PLANT

T. Barendregt

Nuclear projects have one particular thing in common: They all suffer considerable delays. Eurochemic was no exception. According to the 1957 schedule, at the time of the signature of the Convention, the Eurochemic plant would be started up by 1963. As is well known, we were happy to start up in July 1966 on inauguration day, two and a half years behind schedule. Time schedules, and the same is true for cost estimates, are always too optimistic. If this were not the case, many pro­ jects would never have been built. Knowing today what happened to later projects, the delay of Eurochemic appears small. Someone might argue that we were too ear­ ly.

Eurochemic started as an alternative in European cooperation, since the European enrichment plant was considered impossible, due to technical, economical and poli­ tical reasons. It was not the only drawback for the new company, as we have al­ ready heard this afternoon that for certain reasons it had a very complicated and unique structure. We also have heard that the capital was loo small, its location was far from optimal, its capacity was undecided and subject to numerous discus­ sions. The feed, the irradiated fuel, was unkown, or at ieast not specified; part of the process was only demonstrated on a laboratory scale. And furthermore, Euro­ chemic had no organization and had no experienced staff. However, the people who came to Mol to participate in the project from all over Europe, they all had one common quality: They believed in the project and they were prepared to meet the challenge and to bring i t to a success.

It took four pre-projects during the years 1958-60 until the Board of Eurochemic could be convinced that one could build a reprocessing facility for the available money with a capacity which would meet the requirements of the member govern­ ments. Now the requirements were something very big. Although several surveys were made to determine these requirements, it was quite obvious that no one was in a position to answer the question what would be needed. The member states were in different phases of nuclear projects; some of them had already nuclear reactors completed; most of them had only nlins for the future. But as stated before: Delays were imminent. However, in spite of ill these reserves, it was decided to build a plant with a capacity of 400 kg U 'i iv of natural and slightly enriched uranium 235 and 250 kq U/day of uranium with jr. initial enrichment of 1 .6 - b% U. 38

Now, the so-called pre-project number A showed all the signs of stripping an ear­ lier one, which had been rejected for cost reasons. All redundance was removed. Only two extraction cycles were pursued and most of the waste treatment was trans­ ferred to the Belgian Nuclear Research Centre. With the valuable support of the French CEA, the Eurochemic - US Assistance Programme and the information from the proceedings of the symposium on reprocessing in 1957 in Brussels, SGN was ask­ ed to prepare a detailed pre-project on the basis of pre-project No. 4. This detail­ ed pre-project was presented in July 1961. Three and a half years of the six year time schedule had gone and it was obvious that the plant could not be realized for the originally estimated cost, in spite of the adopted austerity principle.

In the meantime, the reactor programmes had incurred more delays, but the need for the reprocessing of enriched fuels from research reactors, with 20 and 90% en­ riched uranium increased. And then it was our US adviser in Eurochemic, Sob Sloat, who showed us that with some small modifications it would be possible to construct a plant enabling the reprocessing of high-enriched uranium by adding a special dissolver and additional waste storage facilities.

The Board approved the detailed pre-project of Saint Gobain requiring a capital increase from the shareholders to keep the possibility of reprocessing high-enriched fuel open. And then we come to the detailed design. And that was an adventure in itself. The rules set by the Convention added new complications: The detailed design was not to be awarded to an experienced firm who was already familiar with the problems of a radioactive chemical plant, but the design should be prepared by not less than ten architect-engineers from seven different countries. All of them should be responsible for their own part, no sub-contract arrangements were fore­ seen, although it was agreed tnat SGN would coordinate the entire project. This not beingenough, the scope distribution amongst the various architect-engineers was both vertical and horizontal. In other words: Complete systems were awarded to one firm, but other firms were supposed to deal with professions of several systems, like instrumentation and ventilation.

It is beyond any doubt that such a scope distribution, so many architects guaran­ tees an optimal technology transfer which was one of the objects of Eurochemic. But it is probably also the optimal method to cause delays, higher costs, no uniformity of design and consequently confusion. All of these aspects were experienced at Eurochemic, in particular in the years 1961-62 at the initial phase of the detailed design. However, what has been mentioned for the Eurochemic team in Mol became true for our architect-engineers: After a difficult start, the whole scheme started to work smoothly. Of course, there were certain drawbacks, which could not be overcome, and Sabena and other airlines have been satisfied with the frequent travels of Eurochemic personnel and their architect-engineers. 39

The excellent collaboration between the architect-engineers of Eurochemic enabled to start with the pile driving for the main process building and the reception and storage area already in the first quarter of 1962. Here it should be emphasized that the relations with the Belgian licensing authorities were optimal. The detailed pro-project being approved in September 1961, it is quite clear that only with the full cooperation of the Belgian ministry in charge a construction license could be obtained only four months later. The experience with other projects in later years has even more highlighted that, here again, we met people who believed in the project and were prepared to take their share of the responsibility.

By the end of 1961, civil construction was well underway, when a severe winter caused a substantial delay in the progress. It gave Eurochemic time for discussions with the architect-engineers to arrive at an optimal design, as it had become ap­ parent that the detailed pre-project, when applied in full, would lead to a conside­ rable overrun of costs. Furthermore, the decision for the second dissolver for the slightly enriched uranium was due. That was the very last moment for the choice between the chemical and mechanical decladding of power reactor fuels. It was one of those typical events which decide much more for the future than the individual

Const rue f ion of rr processing plant in progress - April 1%2. 40

Construction of reprocessing plant in progress - July 1963. decision itself. Frequently, one only realizes the consequences on a later day. To­ day I am sure that the choice for proceeding with chemical decladding, also for power- reactor fuels, has undoubtedly influenced the decision to close the operations of the plant some 10-12 years ago.

The procurement of equipment and materials, as well as the mounting and erection contracts had to follow the same pattern as the choice of the architect-engineers: Tender invitations in all member countries with the aim of arriving at a participa­ tion of as many industries as possible. This goal has been achieved to a large ex­ tent. We got the 80 t overhead crane from Portugal, although we had a very good crrine manufacturer not more than 60 miles away. The pulsed columns came from Austria, and the second dissolver from Italy, just to mention a few exarnplt-s.

In view of the required safe,y in handling radioactive materials, severe quality assurance programmes wore developed which had to be met by the suppliers, the required quality assurance and the intensive quality control, unfamiliar to most of the suppliers, caused delays in delivery times and consequently the erection pro­ gramme had to be modified. However, the piping and erection contractor, ri consor­ tium of French and Belgian companies, was very inventive and adapted non- convent ional solutions, like the installation of the pulsed columns from the top op the mc'.i.i process building with a helicopter, making an effort not to jeopardize the t ime c m dale. 41

Only four years after the approval of the detailed pre-project, and after 40 months of construction, the plant was mechanically complete and testing and calibration started in the Fall of 1965. As expected, not all inter­ faces between the large number of ar­ chitect-engineers had led to optimal solutions, and in spite of all super­ vision regarding clean work, a rabbit was found in one of the vent'lation ducts and it took quite some time be­ fore a protection cap, originally used for protection against dust during transport was discovered and removed from the condensor of one of the waste evaporators.

The startup of the plant, officially on inauguration day in July 1966, in Installation of pulled column. reality lasted one year, since the plu­ tonium tail-end, the most delicate part of the plant, was delayed and needed many modifications, compared with the original design. I think it is appro­ priate to mention here the effort of José Clément, who was in charge o' the unit. It is very sad that José is no longer amongst us.

To overcome the initial shortcomings, the final purification of plutonium was dealt with in the research laboratory, as the burn-up of the fuels in the first batches was low and consequently the content of plutonium was rather small. As all of you will remember, the first campaign was 2 tons of ura­ nium from the French EL-1 with 20 g of plutonium. We were proud that 18 g of them could be recovered.

Thr /?e//r;,in kin/', and Trim Hurrndrrfit fcrnt.rrj on imtufturntion d;iy. 1*1

In his magnificient book "The Atomic Complex", Bertrand Goldschmidt calls Euroche- mic a technical success and a rich source of industrial knowhow for the 13 Euro­ pean partic.pating countries, and concludes that Eurochemic otherwise was a failure from a financial and commercial point of view.

Was it a technical success ? Yes, although partly yes. Obviously it cannot be ignored that the plant has sepa­ rated uranium and plutonium from fission products from a large variety of irra­ diated fuels very successfully during a number of years without any major incident and at a time when no similar plants were in operation worldwide. However, the plant was built to meet the requirements of the participating countries. In order to meet these requirements, the capacity should have been increased gradually. That was hardly possible at Eurochemic, not only due to the chemical decladding process, but probably also because of its location.

Was it a rich source of industrial knowhow ? Yes, although very few countries have used it. Today, twenty years later, it is for me surprising to see that the errors in the Eurochemic design, and there were obviously many, are still not completely recognized and sometimes repeated in the small number of reprocessing plants in the world.

Was it a financial failure ? Probably yes, as the original capital was too small for a commercial plant and the 1961 decision to build a so-called pilot plant did not meet the objectives of all participants, and the member countries were not prepared to continue to fill the operational losses. However, the cost of the plant, including infrastructure and re­ search laboratory, was 30 million dollars. Even with a proper adjustment for money erosion to 100 million dollars and an allowance of the same amount for additional waste handling facilities, one might question if the price of the obtained knowhow would be justified compared to similar development projects today. Last week in Geneva it was announced that the German industrial project, seven times as large as Eurochemic, is estimated in 1983 money at 2 billion dollars. The conclusion is that the answer is not very difficult, although as a financial failure Eurochemic was very cheap.

Was it a commercial failure ? Yes, of course. In 1957 it was not possible to forecast the development of the plu­ tonium market, nor could the public interference in the nuclear programmes be ex­ pected as it became apparent some 12 to 15 years later. There were more reasons why Eurochemic had to sell its services for 20 $ per kilogramme irradiated urani­ um, far below the actual costs. First, there was an old USAEC report from 1956, which pretended that the cost would be 15,30 $ per kilogramme and then there was competition. This last factor, competition, sounds unbelievable today in a world 43

where the back-end of the fuel cycle is endangering the entire nuclear industry. Our price was a political price, and it is very interesting to hear at the same Ge­ neva symposium of the Nuclear Industrial Forum that the price of the reprocessing services today is 600 $ per kg irradiated uranium. Even the OPEC cartel, which has surprised the world with price increases on several occasions, did not dare to add a factor of 30 to their barrel.

Eurochemic has shown that under particular and rather unique circumstances, a reprocessing plant can be built without any major problems in a five years period. Eurochemic has also shown that such a plant, after an initiai tong startup period, can be operated without difficulties. Unfortunately, few plants are planned or under construction at present. The number of storage pools with spent fuel is the concern of everybody who is devoted to the nuclear industry.

Let us hope that the revamping of Eurochemic will contribute once more to the re­ processing knowhow. And finally, I hope we will find again the same spirit as 20 years ago, this time not only for the member countries of Eurochemic in Europe, but to the benefit of all those countries in the free world who have a programme for the peaceful use of nuclear energy. I 45

SURVEY ON RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, SAFETY AND SAFEGUARDS

R. Rometsch

I have received the task to talk about three subjects in thirty minutes. Therefore, I can only proceed by selection and by dropping all formalities. So this is an at­ tempt to show how the three most important boundary conditions for the successful demonstration of industrial reprocessing of nuclear fuel have been established: suf­ ficient technological details to realize in practice a generally known complex pro­ cess, a safety analysis as the basis for plant licensing and a surveillance system to confirm the exclusively peaceful aims as laid down in the political framework of the European joint venture.

Research and Development Survey

Obviously, the objectives of the research and development work changed with the progress in preparing the plant operation. There were three main phases. At the very beginning, during the projecting phase and civil construction work, all efforts were directed to provide missing details for the engineering flowsheet as well as the operating knowhow for special equipment. Major highlights were the adaptations to the Purex flowsheet, which in general we had taken over from the American pu­ blications. That was the task of E. Detilleux's division. They determined distribu­ tion coefficients, filled the gaps in the flowsheet, prepared a rather research type of installation for the plutonium solidification at the tail-end.

The second group of research and development activities which were very important at the beginning was the further development and testing of special technologies, more particularly the technology of pulsed columns in the pilot operation division, then headed by André Redon. Maybe it is not only a happy hazard that the same person is today responsible for the project at the most modern reprocessing plant, where the same type of equipment is used now on a much larger scale. As you see, certain developments and successes of Eurochemic are still very much alive. And then there was another group of activities. In connection with the very first reprocessing campaign in the Eurochemic plant, the research department had also to take over from the plant where only laboratory flexibility could help out. This 46

sounds so very strange today, that it is worthwhile to recount the episode. The fuel used for the active running-in campaign was the first nuclear fuel ever irra­ diated in Europe, the first core load of the French EL-I reactor, also known under the name ZOE. It consisted officially of two tonnes of uranium metal, which was really a mixture of uranium oxide and uranium metal, and which was irradiated to 22 MWd/t and thus contained between 30 and 35 g of plutonium, not considered worthwhile of separation at the start. This fuel had been in a cooling pond for sixteen years, hence appeared to be the right kind of material fo"~ beginners. But by a last minute request we were asked to make an effort and separate at least 1 gramme of the contained plutonium, as it would be a most interesting standard material. And we set our heart to do that.

Thu first idea was to do the operation in the plant. And in order to have a chance that the plutonium would come out, Teun Barendregt, the technical director respon­ sible for plant operation, ordered an additional railway wagon of nitric acid and over-acidified the flowsheet at every possible point in order to make sure that the plutonium would not plate out. The dissolved uranium was recirculated for several weeks through the first extraction cycle in order to accumulate the plutonium. Then the tenfold amount of reducing agent - at that time still ferrosulphamate - was ad­ ded to transfer the plutonium in aqueous solution again.

The result was a highly acidified solution of 2,000 I containing 1 kg of iron, 1 kg of undefined crud and, according to analysis, some 30 g of plutonium. As fur­ ther treatment could not be done in the too large plant equipment, the solution was transferred in a just available Safrap tank to the research laboratory. There Emilio Lopez-Menchero took over. At that moment, we had heard from Italy, by Maurice Zifferero, a member of the Technical Committe, that they had discovered a new type of extraction agent, tri-laury lamine, and that is was very specific for plutonium. Some hundred kilogrammes of the new extradant were ordered, as well as a large series of 20 I funnels, and with a group of technicians loaned from all over the Eurochemic organisation the plutonium was systematically and laboriously shaken out of the dirty solution.

Final result: 26 g of pure plutonium dioxide with an isotopic composition of 99.88% 239 Pu, which is still being used as standard material. And Eurochemic received an additional payment of 6,000 units EMA, then 300,000 BF from the French CEA for the extra work.

In the second period, the plant startup made the research and development work shift to programmes for improving particular steps in the plant operation which were considered not completely up to date. At that time, for instance, it was in the air that one could use uranium) IV) su Iphate instead of ferrosulphamate as a re- 47

ducing agent in the plutonium re-extract ion. But as the sulphate in the nitric sys­ tem would cause corrosion problems, some people in the Technical Committee started to discuss how else one could work with that uranium. And one said: Just make uranium(IV) nitrate. And it was found that if you make the uranium! IV) nitrate very pure, it is stable and you can use it as the most secure reduction agent for Plutonium.

One should however not overlook the numerous details which had to be worked out to overcome the difficulties of chemical decanning, or to construct the first conti­ nuous plutonium oxalate precipitator. The latter was also a common work between the plant people and the research laboratory.

In a third phase, when the plant operation had acquired some status of routine and was dealing with its own analytical development work, the research department concentrated on working out processes adjacent to reprocessing, i.e. graphite fuel dissolution, uranium tetrafluorid precipitation and scores of waste solidification processes for all the different types of radioactive waste arisings. That work was done under the leadership of Lopez-Menchero. Some of these waste solidification pro­ grammes are still of great value today, and I think that the "Pamela-Verfahren" has also some origins here in Mol.

Sometimes in my present work I am confronted with reproaches that those responsi­ ble for nuclear development had at the beginning of the nuclear area forgotten to think what to do with the wastes. Then I make reference to my first review on Eurochemic work, published in 1961, when I concluded that the necessary solidifica­ tion processes fo." preparing wastes for final storage are available and will most probably be further improved like all technologies in practical use. And that is about my selection on the research and development business.

Safety

With regard to safety, in particular the safety analysis of reprocessing plant oper­ ation, the Eurochemic team had also to go into pioneering. In February 1963, when the plant construction was well underway, a special Royal Decree entered into force in Belgium on "Protection of the Population and Workmen against the Hazards Caused by Ionizing Radiation". It regulated inter alia licensing of all kinds of nuclear installations. Eurochemic became a test case for reprocessing. The law also requires a particular type of organisation to enforce safety regulations. A "chef de sécurité" should head a branch parallel to the plant management. He had the responsibility for control and surveillance to assure safe operation, whereas the plant management remained fully responsible for the safe operation of the plant. 48

We had installed a safety committee which met every week for quite some time under my chairmanship, and I must say that was a very interesting experience to have all these discussions on the safety problems in a plant like Eurochemic. I remember one thing in particular, and I would like to tell it. We had a long discussion about responsibility. How should responsibility be divided between health & safety controlling and the plant people ? And we came to a conclusion which is still to­ day of great importance: The responsibility rests with the plant people and is not reduced by the single fact that there is a control. The control responsibility of the health and safety is in addition and is completely secondary. This kind of con­ cept is the only concept in which you can avoid that there is division of responsi­ bility, and division of responsibility in the kind of operations like Eurochemic is no good. We found it of particular importance to discuss and clarify thoroughly that the two-tier organization would not lead to the impression of divided responsi­ bility, but rather that it should reinforce the arrangement of safety introducing an additional responsibility assigned to the safety branch.

The second thing I wanted to mention briefly is our safety report. According to the Royal Decree of 1963 we had to ask for an operating license and in order to get that operation permit, we had to present a safety analysis. It must, on the basis of a plant and process description, assess all kinds of accident scenarios and show how one could deal with the consequences. The "chef de sécurité", then Walter Hun- zinger, was nominated chief editor of the safety report, which ended up into a rather large type of paper work. It filled three large volumes. It was written in English and it was submitted to the authorities during the inactive testing of the main plant, some months before we thought to be ready for the active startup. And just to answer some questions of Mr. von Busekist, it had to be carefully discussed with the Belgian authorities how it should be transmitted. And they, for practical reasons, preferred English and recommended us to write a one page cover letter in Flemish. And that is what we did.

Evidently, we had overlooked the fact that this first major case of licensing an installation in which megacuries of radioactive materials were to be handled would require an evaluation by an international expert commission, which could be almost as time-consuming as the establishment of the safety report itself. When I learned that a licensing decree could not be expected before two years had elapsed, the question arose whether we would be able to muster political and financial support to cover an additional delay of realisation. We were November 1965, and Eurochemic was more or less ready to start up the plant.

But there was an other way out. The 25th anniversary of Eurochemic provides now the opportunity to disclose this story. I do it in the honour of the late Dr. Halter who showed a rare degree of understanding and a sense of responsibility which he succeeded to transmit also to others. 49

I had learned from the Ministry of Public Health that there was no procedure to grant a provisional license. But my colleagues in the Belgian industry told me that it would be acceptable under certain circumstances to assume responsibility of oper­ ating an industrial installation before completing the licensing procedure. However. it appeared to me impossible to follow that course without at least a hint to offi­ cial confirmation. Therefore I arranged a business luncheon with Dr. halter, then director-general in the Ministry of Public Health responsible for licensing. I think we both had our field day of roundabout conversation not naming the subject. Over coffee, Dr. Halter ended the game by stating: I am the last person who could tell you to go ahead. But I can tell you one thing: If you go ahead and start the plant without a permit and you have a difficulty or an accident, you'll have to go to prison. And if you have a permit and you go ahead and you have an acci­ dent, I go to prison with you.

R. Rometsch (right) and E. Drtilleux (centre) explaining to king Baudoin the workings of the dissolution unit in the pilot, hall, on inauguration day. 50

I understood then that it would be considered with benevolence if the Company would start plant operation under its own responsibility with fuel of lower burn- up, as foreseen anyway. This way of doing was taking into consideration the spe­ cial circumstances of the situation, new rules in a new field, imposing lengthy pro­ cedures to an almost completed project, already thoroughly discussed with the com­ petent authorities. I discussed the situation with the Eurochemic team and laid the necessary emphasis on our own safety responsibility.

But the story is not finished, because the king of the Belgians would be present at the inauguration, and a few days before the ceremony, he let us know that he did not want to make any fake operation. If he would have to press the button or start something, it must be the real thing ! On July 7, 1966, the Eurochemic plant was inaugurated, of course in big style. Three hundred invited guests, mainly from OECD countries, assisted to the ceremony in the fuel reception and storage hall. The climax was the lowering of the first load of irradiated fuel - from the above mentioned ZOE reactor - into the dissolver by the king of the Belgians.

Immediately after that, the king and the spectators started for visiting the instal­ lations. Dr. Halter managed to come to my side and said with a fine smile: Mon­ sieur Rometsch, ne pensez pas que vous ave/ un permis maintenant parce que le roi a poussé le bouton ! It took still more than a year before we received the licensing decree. Before and after that date, operations were conducted with an ex­ cellent safety record. In fact, Eurochemic received for several years the first price in Belgium for safe industrial operation. It always helps to face one's responsibi­ lities.

Safeguards

I have understood that this topic, safeguards, was also given to me, because at Eurochemic I had something to do with safeguards. From the preparation work we did at Eurochemic, I would like to pick out two points, which later on have become of some worldwide importance.

In fact, the term "safeguards" gained more significance only towards the end of the sixties, when the Non-proliferation Treaty entered into force. At Eurochemic, the necessary preparations were made to assure a precise and complete nuclear ma­ terial accountability. It was meant for our own purposes, as well as for presenta­ tion to the ENEA and the Euratom inspectorate. As promised, I will tell you two examples which may highlight our attitude to the safeguarding question.

During the working out of the specification for plant equipment, the technical di­ rector, then Teun Barendregt, insisted that on each and every vessel in the plant 51

a sampling tube shouid be instaiied. Connections to the sampling stations wouid only be made for a few of them, but it should be possible to install sampling lines whenever inventory taking would so require.

In my later activities in the Safeguards Départirent of the IAEA, I had the oppor­ tunity to observe that such a constructive attitude towards safeguarding was by ro means internationally accepted. In one case, even sampling of major plutonium storage vessels was not foreseen. It was just not possible to make a determination of the quantity of plutonium corning out of the plant. I regretted that Barendregt had not been there.

At Eurochemic we also fought for a clear cut limitation of safeguarding to the prac­ tically possible. Our technical director participated in the Safeguards Committee of the IAEA revising the guidelines for safeguard agreements. Based on practical experience and thorough discussions in the Eurochemic team, Teun Barendregt de­ fended the principle that "atoms cannot be marked", that use limitations must be set for defined quantities and not for specific lots of nuclear material. This prin­ ciple has later helped to rationalize the accountancy system which is the basis for safeguarding in connection with the Non-proliferation Treaty. Unfortunately, it is still not universally accepted. Double labelling boardering closely to the marking of atoms, has been tried in connection with the US Non-proliferation Act.

And that ends my remarks on safeguards. I like to conclude whatever I say with some remarks for the future. You see, in the nuclear business there are not very many dangers. I would say that the greatest danger in the nuclear business is the human being. And that is why I consider that one of the biggest hazards of nu­ clear industry is the hazard of misusing nuclear energy by making and using bombs. And therefore I thought it also important to make some remarks about the very political and very difficult problem of safeguards. And I think this interna­ tional safeguards form has to go through quite a bit of further development before some form of consensus can be found on the subject. And only then can we free our­ selves from the fear connected to that problem. And isn't that the most important thing for human beings, to get free of fear ?

I would like to close my remarks by stating that the work within the Eurochemic team was for me the most satisfactory professional experience. It certainly brought to light all kinds of human qualities, but one idea dominated clearly: a common effort to a common rational goal creates durable values and human bounds.

53

OPERATION OF THE PLANT ANO THE PERIOD AFTER SHUTDOWN

E. Deti lieux

The intention of this paper is to review and comment briefly the outstanding events of the technical activities performed at Eurochemic from the active startup of the plant on July 7, 1966 until today. For this purpose, the activities of thepast 17 years are divided into three groups, namely: I. Reprocessing; 2. Plant cleaning and decontar.inat ion ; 3. Waste management.

1. The Reprocessing Activities

The first active test runs, which started the day of the inauguration, were per­ formed with 2 t of fuels discharged from Zoé, the first French reactor, which had the following main characteristics: 2 t natural U metal canned in AI Burn-up of 24.5 MWD/t Cooling time of 9 years B/Y : 0.05 Ci/kg U 239 Pu total : 0.02 g/kg U; Pu > 90^.

As the plutonium tail-end facility of the plant was not yet operable at that time, the final purification of the Zoé plutonium was carried out in the research labora­ tory. For this purpose, the 1 BSP stream leaving the partitioning column was col­ lected in a portable vessel. The purification steps applied to 1.7 m3 of solution are summarized in this table:

Feed solution ( ^1.7 m3)

Pu'" 16., 6 mg/l (28. .32 g) ,v u 137 mg/l Fe+++ 650 mg/l HNO 1 .35 M

Purification steps

- Concentration by co-procipi tat ion of Fe(0H)3 and Pu(0H)3 - Dissolution of the precipitate in HN03 - Evaporation - Batchwise extraction with TLA - Precipitation from TLA by oxalic acid - Final purification by ion exchange - Precipitation as oxalate - Calcination

Recovery

26.05 g Pu out of -v- 39.3 g in the fuels, or -«.71.3%.

This special operation is recalled here because this first test run remains in the memory of many former and present Eurochemic staff members as a pioneer work from the "good old times", when plutonium could be handled as a chemical product and not as a potential explosive for terrorists.

Let us now have a quick look on the characteristics and amounts of fuels which have been processed at Eurochemic:

1 . Natural and slightly enriched uranium

Gas graphite reactors 10 t Burn-up 900-1,500 MWD/t HWR 70 t 4,000-6,000 PWR 72 t 12,900-21,000 BWR 30 t 6,000-17,300

182 t Recovered plutonium: 678 kg

2. Highly enriched uranium

U-AI alloy (MTR fuels): 30 t 235, Recovered uranium: 1.4 t (80-85% U)

Specific Activity of the Fuel (MCi/t U)

1 1 II III IV V I

I Origin of Standard Tri no Dodewaard Sena Belgian j I the fuel fuel A 1 NL F LWR's | | I Burn-up | (MWD/t U) 10,000 21,000 12,000 19,800 34,000 | 1 1 I Cooling time 150 days 300 days 200 days 300 days 1,000 days | I1 I Activity 1 (MCi/t U) 1.9 1.3 1.7 1.9 0.9 | 1| 1 Tons I reprocessed 1.5 3.1 12 i 55

MCi 10- TU

I = reference fuel considered in the Safety Analysis; ll-IV = actually pro­ cessed fuels; V = fuels currently unloaded today.

Processed Fuels According to Canning and Core Material

Canning material Core material 1 tons % 1 j tons | % 1 | 1 AI 32 17.6 1 u metal 39 | 21.4 | 1 Mg 22 12.0 1 u-M-o 10 | 5.5 | 1 SS 49 26.9 | U02 133 | 73.1 | 1 Zy 79 43.5 i t 182 100 182 | 100 I 1 .. i

The rather limited production for a period of 8 years is mainly the result of the measures which were imposed on the plant operators to limit the mixing between batches of different enrichments or/and different origins. This situation was still aggravated by the small size of many individual batches.

This handicap was particularly important for each yearly campaign for MTR fuels. The necessity to limit the risks for the highly enriched uranium to be depleted and cross-contaminated with plutonium required careful rinsing of the plant prior and after the MTR processing campaign. This situation resulted from the fact ihat fhe extraction cycles were common to all types of fuels processed in the plant, leading to a common final extraction cyclr for the h ghly enriched uranium on the one hand and the plutonium on the other hand. 56

To improve the situation, an additional extraction cycle was installed and commis­ sioned in 1973, leading to separate final extraction cycles for highly enriched ura­ nium and for plutonium. Unfortunately, this improvement could be used only for the last MTR campaign.

The Head-end Operation

While chemical dec I adding was largely used in various reprocessing plants for alu­ minium and magnesium canned fuels, Eurochemic is probably the only one which applied chemical dec I add ing to stainless steel and zircaloy cladded assemblies. These processes, initiated in the United Stated and further developed at Eurochemic, are respectively known as the Sijlfex and Zirflex processes.

CHEMICAL DECLADDING PROCESSES

I Cans compos it ion Average I i Ree ipi ent m3/t U Losses | M U Pu | g/i <%> mg/l |

1 AI NaOH 0.5

NaNC3 4.7 0.15 1.2 | (0.07)

1 Mg H2S04 0.2 1.6 0.97 2.7 | (0.16) 1 ss H2S04 4-5 7.5 0.40 3.3 | (0.3) 1 Zy NH F 5-6 NH*NO. 0,5-2 S.O 1.3 7.6 | 4 3 (0.65) 1 . ,. 1

Construction Material for the Dissolver: Ni-o-nel CS-M2

Ni 39-42 % Co 0.20 % max. Cr 20-22 % Mn 0.60 % max. Mo 2.5-3.5 % Si 02 0.50 % max. Cu 1.25-2.25 % S 0.020 % max. Al 0.20% max. Ti 20 x % C min. C 0.015 % max.

This table shows that the chemical decladding processes are generating significant volumes of intermediate level wastes of very different chemical nature requiring se­ parate storage vessels. Moreover, these processes are sources of non-negl igeable losses of uranium and plutonium in the waste streams. In add tion, most of these processes are very slow ones, and therefore constituted an important bottleneck for the operation of the plant. These remarks are particularly applicable to the Sulfex and Zirflex processes demonstrating that the chemical decladding is not to be con­ sidered for commercial reprocessing plants. 57

As soon as 1969, Eurochemic considered to acquire the chopping device which start­ ed its development in France. A conceptual study for its installation in the plant was even ordered by Eurochemic from SGN, but the financing of the project could not be obtained. However, it must be pointed out that in spite of the agressive character of the reagents used, no corrosion problems were encountered in the head-end facility. An inspection performed with a video camera in the dissolver after its decontamina­ tion revealed an excellent behaviour of the selected construction material, namely a modified version of the commercial alloy available at that time under the name of Ni-o-nel.

The Extraction Operation

Until today, Eurochemic is the only European reprocessing plant which was fully equipped with pulsed columns. This fact explains, at least partly, the ability of the plant to process smoothly fuels with rather high specific activities as shown earlier. As all of you know, all the projects for future plants are now based on the use of pulsed columns as extraction devices.

The rather intensive works carried out by Eurochemic's research department in the early days of the Company helped to develop and improve auxiliary devices for the operation and control of the pulsed columns, such as: the pulsation by com­ pressed air, avoiding the use of diaphragm or bellows pulse generators; the control of the bottom interface position by air bubbling; the controlled feeding using double stage air-lifts.

As early as 1968, the ferrosulphamate used as reducing agent of the plutonium in the partitioning column was replaced by uranous nitrate obtained by electroly t ical reduction of part of the uranyl nitrate leaving the plant as final uranium product.

The specifications set up for the final uranium product were sometimes difficult to meet due to the fact thai the plant is equipped with only one extraction cycle after the co-decontamination and partitioning cycle. Recyclings of the uranium stream through the second extraction cycle generally allowed to cope with the situation; these recyclings obviously contributed as wed to the lowering of the plant through­ put.

This development effort, together with the experience gained by the operation of the plant, enabled Eurochemic. to build up an important knowhow in the field of liquid-liquid extraction applied to reprocessing. 58

The Plutonium Tail-end

The plutonium leaving the second extraction cycle was precipitated by oxalic acid and converted into Pu02 by calcination. The decontamination in fission products and uranium achieved by the precipitation step was generally sufficient to meet the specifications for the plutonium final product. However, a third extraction cycle for the plutonium stream certainly would have offered a better guarantee to meet them more easily.

Moreover, towards the end of plant operation, it became evident that the equipment and the glove box system used had to be redesigned soon in order to cope with the gamma and neutron doses resulting from the handling of plutonium recovered from fuels with steadily increasing burn-up. This remodeling was not performed due to the decision to shut down the plant.

Equipment Behaviour and Interventions

Generally speaking, the behaviour of the equipment was very satisfactory. The ma­ jor problems encountered were leaks; the most serious ones affected two evaporators and the plugging of the feed line to the first extraction column HA.

One of the leaking evaporators was used to concentrate the plutonium stream leaving the extraction; this problem was encountered in several reprocessing plants. The evaporator was removed but not replaced; indeed, the required plutonium con­ centration could be achieved by operating the second plutonium cycle with a reflux flowsheet.

The leak in the second evaporator, which was used as a multipurpose evaporator, was detected on a weld of the bottom of the stripping column, located at the level of the liquid-vapor interphase. The radiography of this weld taken during the con­ struction had been judged as "acceptable" but of a lower grade thar normally ac­ cepted. The leak was repaired immediately after a quick decontamination of the evaporator.

The plugging of the HA column feed line resulted from an insufficient rinsing prior to the yearly shutdown. The plug was essentially due to zirconium oxide pealed off from the surfaces of the fuel rods. The unplugging could be achieved only by cutting the line, introducing a cleaning nozzle and spraying water at very high pressure, i.e. by techniques used to clean pipes in boilers and chemical installa­ tions. After this incident, the dissolution solutions were systematically clarified by centrifugation. 59

The interventions in the active areas, which were required to allow these repairs, as well as the interventions performed to install the additional extraction cycle mentioned earlier were all executed safely and without incidents, thanks to very careful preparations.

Overall Material Balance

I Distribution | % of input | 1 i U | Pu |

| Recovered final product | 97.54 | 93.59 |

| Waste streams | | | | DW | 0.35 (1) | 0.68 (1) | | LLW + ILLW | 1.50 (2) j 0.42 | I HLLW | 0.38 | 0.45 | I SW | 0.05 | 3.24 (3) j

! Total | 2.28 | 4.79 |

I III I MUF (1983) | 0.18 | 1.62 | i ill | 100 | 100 | Remarks (1) U and Pu losses in DW. (2) U losses in LLW + ILLW due to rinsing operations. (3) Pu losses in SW due to conversion equipment. MUF for highly enriched uranium: 0.51% of input.

This table distributes the amounts of uranium and plutonium processed according to the final products actually recovered, the various waste streams and the mate­ rial unaccounted for (MUF). When examining this table, one observes the following: The rather important losses of uranium and plutonium in the decladding wastes already outlined earlier; The high losses of uranium in the LLLW and ILLW due essentially to the rinsing operations also outlined earlier; The high losses of plutonium in the SW, originating almost completely from the plutonium conversion facility. This is explained by the fact that the equipment installed had to be improved, almost continuously, on the basis of the experience acquired by the operation of the facility. This situation implied frequent interven­ tions requiring the emptying and cleaning of the main pieces of the equipment, operations which produced large amounts of solid wastes. As will be seen later, an important fraction of the plutonium present in the solid waste is presently re­ covered in the acid digestion unit which was commissioned at Eurochemic early this year. 60

2. Plant Cleaning and Decontamination

The cleaning and decontamination operations started in January 1975, immediately after the shutdown of the reprocessing plant. The decontamination programme was divided into three main phases:

Phase A Fissile material rinsing Phase B Remote decontamination Phase C Direct decontamination and dismantling.

Let us now briefly review the main characteristics of these various phases, which will be detailed in the paper to be presented by Mr. Hild.

Phase A: Fissile Material Rinsing

Objective: To wash out fissile material heels from process loops. Means: Circulation in process loops of process reagents, i.e. nitric acid, plu­ tonium reducers, kerosene; heating and agitation.

Controls: Sampling and chemical analysis of solutions. Duration: 4 months (120 hours per week).

Phase B: Remote Decontamination

Objective: To lower radiation levels to allow direct "in cell" decontamination and intervention. Means: As in phase A, but more agressive solutions: nitric acid and caustic solutions with oxidizing and complexing agents; sulphuric or hydro­ fluoric acids, etc. Controls: Sampling and chemical analysis of solutions; monitoring at reference points. Duration: 14 months (120 hours per week).

Results of Rinsing and Remote Decontamination Phases

Decontamination solutions: before concentration ^ 370 m3 after concentration ^ 70 m3 (medium-level waste) Washed out: % of plant input activity HO KCi B ^0.1 uranium 390 kg ^ 0.2 (recovered 33 kg) plutonium 3,870 g ^ 0.6 (recovered 1,100 g) Plant MUF: U: 0.22% Pu : 1.58%

Phase C: Direct Decontamination

Objective: To reach radiological conditions suitable to long duration in-cell in­ terventions. Means; Crews in cells. Lowering of radiation by local shielding and high pressure water jc-ts; lowering of contamination by spraying reagents, 61

brushing and wiping, hammering concrete; partial and local dismant­ ling. Controls: Monitoring. Duration: 20 months (40 hours per week).

Main Decommissioning Operations

In cells: Thermosyphon evaporator; Dissolver tubes Diluent washer Removal of Raschig rings

Facilities: Fuel reception and storage Pu02 production Analytical Laboratory Underwater solid waste storage

Decontamination and Dismantling Waste Management

Liquid wastes: Processed as the reprocessing wastes. 70 m3 of medium-level waste to be bituminized and stored onsite.

Solid wastes: B/Y wastes: non combustible: 1,160 drums of 220 1^ combustible: 1,030 drums of 220 I.

Sea dumping after conditioning. Non combustible: 80 drums of 220 I stored onsite. a wastes: 308 boxes of 28 I awaiting conditioning.

Breakdown of Time Spent for Active Interventions (manhours)

1 • ••• - • 1 1 •• 'I- • • 1 I 1 Actually | Initial | Difference | | | carried out | forecast | {%) |

| Fuel reception and storage | 25,450 | 18,920 | + 34.5 |

| Main plant j 30,710 j 11,715 j + 162.0 |

j Analytical laboratory j 11,250 | 9,340 | + 20.4 j

| TOTAL I 67,410 | 39,975 | + 68.6 | i 1 l ...... 1 . . J

Breakdown of Costs

Personnel : 75%

Protective equipment: 3%

Solid waste management: 7%

Mi seel laneous: 15%

The operations of these three p> r:rs just described were performed between early

1974 and the Autumn of 1979. 62

EVOLUTION OF RADIATION LEVELS IN SOME PROCESS CELLS

Operation periods: I Reprocessing II Rinsing (phase A) III Remote decontamination (phase B) IV Direct decontamination (phase C)

4. Waste Management

The low-level liquid arid solid wastes generated by Eurochemic ' s activities were currently disposed of. The liquid wastes were discharged to the river after appro­ priate treatment in the installation operated for this purpose by the SCK/CEN. The solid wastes, after appropriate conditioning by either Eurochemic or the SCK/CEN, were disposed of by sea dumping. 63

The following table gives the inventory of the other categories of liquid «vast» which have been generated so far by Eurochemic's activities.

LIQUID WASTES INVENTORY - MAIN CHARACTERISTICS

I Average 6/Y Volume 1 1 Type of waste Main inert components 1 activity generated , 1 (Ci/m3) (m3) 1

| A. ILLW • a. Decanning sol. I Al jackets NaOH, 2M; AI, 2M | 40 150 | , Mg + SS jackets SSO, 6M ; MgO, 2M, H2S04, 1 .8M 800 260 1 SS jackets SSO, 8M; H2S04, 2M I 1,000 140 i • Zr jackets ZrO, 4M; F~, 2.7M; NH4+, 1 .1M ; N03~, 0.1 M | 800 400 | 1 ______JL _ _ __ . 1 __ 1 _ _ J • b. Concentrates NaN03, 5M; HN03, 2M 1 ,000 1,220

| B. HLLW • Pure* waste HN03, 2M 178,000 65 | U-AI waste HN03, 0.5M; Al+++, 1,8M I 8,400 800 I

1 I C. Organic Waste Spent solvent • and diluent 9 to 30% TBP in kerosene "•• 8.5 25

The conditioning into bitumen of the ILLW by means of bi tuminization will be completed within the coming months. The main characteristics of the process ap­ plied so far are briefly outlined in this table.

ILLW Conditioning and Surface Storage

1. Chemical pre-treatment

Objectives: precipitation of salts; reduction of corrosivity; insolubi I ization of radionuclides. Product: Slurry at "v 50 wt% solids.

2. Incorporation into bitumen

Objectives: distillation of water; homogeneous dispersion into bitumen; pouring into drums. Product: Mixture ^ 50 wt% bitumen.

3. 5urface storage in vaults; by remote handling. 64

A total of about 12,500 drums will be produced and stored in three shielded vaults built onsite. These drums, due to their alpha content, should eventually be trans­ ferred to a geological repository.

The HLLW will be vitrified. In application of the Convention concluded between Bel­ gium and Eurochemic in 1978, the Purex waste will be vitrified in the Pamela faci­ lity, now under construction on the Eurochemic site. This facility is being built to demonstrate the vitrification process developed in Germany, in co-operation with Eurochemic. Eurochemic's MTR waste will be processed in the AVB plant. This faci­ lity, to be built by SGN and operated by the future operator, will also vitrify the HLLW which will arise from the reprocessing plant put back into operation.

HLLW Conditioning

I. Stored Waste

1. From natural and slightly enriched U processing (Purex) volume: ^ 64 m3 B/Y: •> 140-200 Ci/l free HN03: 2.3-2.9 M

2. From MTR highly enriched U processing

volume: -v 800 m3 e/y: 6.5-13.6 Ci/l free HN03: 0.5-0.6 M Al: 1.7-2 M Hg: 2-2.8 g/l

II. Conditioning by Vitrification

AVM (French process): glass blocks; detailed pre-project in progress PAMELA (German process): glass blocks and vitromet; under conjirur- tion; hot operation 1985-86

The situation related to the conditioning of various ^o!id wastes which could not be discharged to the sea is given in the next table. (See page 66) The spent solvent was conditioned by using the Eurowatt process developed 'it Euro­ chemic in the past years. (See principles on page 66)

4. Conclusion

I hope that this review will confirm the generally accepted opinion, that, while Eurochemic has met a lot of difficulties of institutional, political and financial na­ ture, its experience has been successful from the technical point of view. I am con vinced that the sessions of tomorrow will further contribute to reinforce this opinion which is shared by everyone who in one way or another hod (he opportunity to tie- come acquainted with the Eurochemic adventure. 65

PRINCIPLE OF PAMELA PROCESS

TO THE ADDITIVES ci ASS mil ATMOSPHERI

Dust clr^nrr -0

'1X GAS IREAIMfNI

C Al r INI i( (.I ASS MEI IEH Recycling 1 vrssel I LIOUID |

r««tj tanks

INTERIM STORAGE Ola** h I nek mot., I .illov

I ID FIT T IMC. AND OUTSIDE DECONTAMINATION -£> Dlsl'd^/,1

PRINCIPLE OF AVB PROCESS

ADDITIVES FOM (H ASS I HI T TO IHE ATMOSPMF f'l TAI ('INAT ION

[ Just ' Iran»*

GAS 7 Hf ATMf Nt 66

SOLID WASTE INVENTORY - STATUS 1983

TYPE i NATURE | STORAGE | CONDITIONING

HLWS | Fuel scraps | | to be defined (27.5 m3) | Dissolution heels | underwater | by Belgium I Technological scraps | |

IL5W | Ventilation filters | | sorting out (•^75 m3) | Graphite jackets | concrete | compacting I Filtration material | containers | cutting I Technological scraps | | concreting I Miscellaneous > 500 mrad/h | | (in progress)

Alpha SW | Kleenex | | acid digestion (800 kg; | Plastic material | plastic bags i n j (AL0NA) 7-9 kg Pu)| Tissues, etc. | metal boxes | Pu recovery | Mainly from Pu conversion | | (in progress) i ill

PRINCIPLE OF EUROWATT PROCESS

| Spent solvent | H P j 1 3 °4 | TBP, Kerosene |_ 100% I DP*, FP, U, Pu J L | MIXER-SETTLER

1 1 1 1 H P | 3 °4 j 1 Kerosene | 1 (pure) | 1 1 1 | TBP,DP*! 1 |FP,U,Pu| 1

Reuse / V Disposal | Off-gas | f 1 1 i p i | Cx Hy | 1 Y j i R 1 1 1 0 | ? 1 L | Release I Y j 1 s i 1 E | 1 Bi tuminization i R 1 I H PC\ ! or 1 f Vitrification | DF*,FP u p u 1 ! DP Der) r H dat ion products from TBP and kerosene. Second Session TECHNICAL EXPERIENCE OF EUROCHEMIC

Cha irmen

Rudolf Rometsch Former general manager of Eurochemic Teun Barendregt Former technical director of Eurochemic's reprocessing plant

Speakers

Hubert Eschrich Deputy manager of Eurochemic Bo Gustafsson Former head of Eurochemic's Plant Operation Department, now manager of the Swedish Nuclear Fuel Supply Co. & Louis Geens Head of Eurochemic's Main Plant Section in the Plant Operation Department

Rolf Berg Former head of Eurochemic's Analytical Laboratories Division, now head of the Analytical Services at WAK & Henning Bokelund Former head of Eurochemic's Spectro-AnaIyses Laboratory Section, now working for the Transuranium Institute, Karlsruhe

Erik Van der Stijl Euratom Safeguards Directorate, head of the sector of reprocess i ng

Werner H iId Head of Eurochemic's Plant Operation Department Jacques van Gee I Head of Eurocbemic's Industrial Development Department Alexis Osipenco Head of Eurochemic's Health and Safety Department 67

R&D ACHIEVEMENTS AT EUROCHEMIC

H. Eschrich

I would like to present a review of the R&D achievements at Eurochemic during the past 25 years. And this I will try to do within 25 minutes. I can tell you at once the essence of the R&D experience gained at Eurochemic in one sentence: A continued R&D work of high quality is a must for a successful industrial repro­ cessing !

It is my intention to speak a little bit about many investigations, and a little more about some special achievements. Most of you will remember that Eurochemic had three tasks: to reprocess fuel from the member countries; to train chemists, engineers and technicians from the member countries; and to carry out research connected to the processing of irradiated fuels. So it is said in the Statutes of the Company.

Today we may state that all these tasks have been fulfilled with success. We may state furthermore that the technical successes of Eurochemic would not have been possible without the engagement, the skilfulness and the achievements of Euro­ chemic's research staff.

The development achievements and the assistance given to the plar.t by the research personnel was a necessity for the successful plant operation, for the process and product controls and finally also for the decontamination and waste treatment acti- vi ties.

From the experience gained at Eurochemic I have drawn the conclusion, and maybe others too, that research and development work of a high standard is a necessity for a successful industrial fuel reprocessing and waste management. We would wish that any industrial reprocessor is aware of this Eurochemic experience and uses it to his advantage.

One can distinguish three periods in Eurochemic's R&D activities, each period lasting about eight years and covering the periods before, during and after repro­ cessing. In each of these periods, specific tasks of a wide, wide variety had to be fulfilled as you may see in the following overview. 68

OVERVIEW OF EUROCHEMIC'S R&D PERIODS

1 . 1959-66 Before Reprocessing

Preparation for active startup:

- process equipment - flowsheets - analytical methods and equipment

2. 1966-74 During Reprocessing

Plant assistance Optimization of processes and controls

- dissolution and extraction - use of U(IV) Np recovery 85,. Kr recovery - UNH conversion to UF, and U0_ A 2

- automation of analytical procedures

Waste treatment studies

- HLW solidification - MLW bi tuminization - solvent waste treatment

3. 1974-83 After Reprocessing

Decontamination Waste conditioning

In the first period, all activities were related to the startup of the plant. During the eight years of reprocessing the research personnel gave assistance to the plant and made efforts to optimize the processes and the controls. At the end of 1971, the Board of Directors of the Company decided that from 1972 onwards all develop­ ment work should exclusively be devoted to the treatment of our reprocessing wastes.

The works carried out after 1972, especially our industrial scale achievements in decontamination and waste conditioning will be dealth with later in two lectures of this session.

Most of the development work was carried out by about fifty technicians in the Research Building, which consists of three main parts: a cold wing, a hot wing and a pilot hall, also called testing sta'ion. The hot wing has seven laboratories for radioactive work, especially with plutonium and other actinides. The hot wing i«>

also house- a small reprocessing facitin. uil,-,! Janus. • »<<• .-«' of which is shown in the picture Deiow .

Extraction coll of "Janus" reprocrssin/i facility.

The mixer-settler you see in this picture has been developed .it Luroc hcmi< ,md is characterized by its air-pulsation system avoiding mechanical stirrer,. All settler- chambers are on one side.

The testing station has two hot cells dnd pilot plants for extraction

tion .

The organization scheme below show.. th<.it in the period before reproe e.^ a rig the technical work was distributed among throe departments: Testing Station: Process Chemistry and Analytical Development. The depart merit heads are M t'il in chrono­ logical order. It is their work and tiuit of iheir collaborators I will no.1, review.

1. First R&D Period (1959-66)

The development work in the first year's was devoted primarily In •l'1 i' ,-.en t ia I step- of the Pur-rx process, i.e. to the head en'i prn>' • . I1"' final 70

R&D ORGANIZATION SCHEME

1959-66

RESEARCH MANAGERS R. Rometsch

After 1966

TECHNICAL DIRECTION

Testing Station Process Chemistry Anal. Development

I 1 I Industr. Development I Process Control

A. Redon (F) E. Deti lieux (B) T. Erben (T) J. Van Caeneghem (B) E. Lopez-Menchero IE) B. Edwall (S) J. Centeno (E) G. Rolandi (I) H. Eschrich (D) H. Eschrich (D) J. van Geel (NL)

purification of the products, especially plutonium, and the analytical methods and equipment needed to control all these processes. Most of the waste management studies were started later.

1.1 Head-end

Let us consider first the head-end studies which were of decisive importance for the chemical reprocessing at Eurochemic. You will remember that in contrast to pre­ sent day reprocessing plants, Eurochemic had chosen a chemical head-end to cope with the wide variety of fuels to be treated.

Quite some efforts were devoted to the testing of the chemical head-end flowsheets and the design of the plant head-end equipment, especially the design of the dis- solvers and the construction materials were carefully studied. Experimental demon­ strations of the various chemical decanning processes and fuel dissolution processes were performed and the flowsheets established. 71

The so-called Sulfex process for the dissolution of stainless steel cans and the Zir- flex process for the dissolution of Zircaloy cans were already known, but Euroche­ mic was the first to apply them on a production scale.

HEAD-END R&D WORKS

Development and testing of dissolution processes for various canning and fuel materials

Chemical Decanning

AI NaOH Mg H2S04 Cr-Ni steel H2S04 (Sulfex) Zr NH4F + NH4N03 (Zirflex)

Fuels

U metal HN03 U02 HN03 U/Mo HN03 U/AI HN03 + Kg as catalyst U/Zr NH4F + NH4N03 (Zirflex)

An enormous experimental effort has been put into the optimization of the Zirflex process and the knowledge of the chemistry involved. Today we know that this was worthwhile. It might be a miracle to the chemical decanning experts, but our Zir­ flex solution has been stable over its entire storage period of more than eight years, until its solidification by bi tuminizat ion, which is now finished.

Our experience allowed us in later years to develop a complete flowsheet for the reprocessing of highly enriched uranium-zirconium fuels, based on a dissolution of the fuel by a Zirflex type process. Furthermore, a variant of the Zirflex process, the so-called Citriflex process was developed and patented by Eurochemic. In thio process, citric aci

Less known is the fact that Eurochemic has also developed two Zircaloy dec.anniruj processes which have been designated as chemical chopping processes: the scratch and chop process and the clean-up process.

The scratch and chop process uses the phenomenon that Zirc-iloy is preferential ly dissolved at places where the protective zirconium oxide layer is, hurt , where it is damaged. The Zirr

or in a spiral (see picture to the left) and then im­ mersed in a Zirflex mixture (NH4F-NH4N03) which dis­ solves (cuts) the tube se­ lectively at the scratches within some few minutes. After washing, the fuel can be leached out by ni­ Disse- tric acid as in the usual chop and leach process.

,:> m * y-- Another decanning process based on an electrochemical attack of the oxide layer has been developed and patented by Eurochemic and called the clean-up Uöm**v process (see picture on the next page).

The dissolution of non-ir­ radiated fuel core material # consisting of either U02 or U alloys was also tested Scratch and chop process. in detail.

1.2 Extraction

The development work for the I iquid-! iqjid extraction part included the determina­ tion of distribution data in the TBP-HN03 system and the establishment of extraction flowsheets and their testing with lov. Durn-up fuels in a shielded cell using mixer- settlers.

The performance of the selected chemie-il Mowsheets was also checked in the three pulsed columns of the testing station u-, ng pure uranium solutions. Later on, the flowsheets were tested with real irradiati •'. uranium solutions in the reprocessing plant of the Institute for Atomic Energy in KV-i'jr, Norway.

The use of U(IV) nitrate in the partition cycle, for the reduction of Pu(lV), instead of ferrous sulfamate was thoroughly investigator' and as some of you will remember, later on also used with success in the plant. 73

Clean-up process.

In the testing station, the operation and control of pulsed columns were studied in detail. During this work, some original techniques have been developed which have become very well known, for example: the bottom interface control using direct air-purged dip tubes (located in the column decanter) and the air-pulsation system in which the compressed air inlet and outlet valves are controlled by an electrical­ ly driven cam shaft.

1.3 Tai l-end

The third important part of the PUIH-X proces» developments concerns the tail-end treatments of uranium and plutonium. For the final purification of plutonium, two lines were followed: the testing of the known an ion-exchange process, and the de­ velopment of a new method based on liquid-liquid extraction using tertiary amines and quarternary ammonium salts.

Eurochernic finally developed a plutonium tail-end process which consisted in the extraction of tetravalent plutonium by a solution of tri laury I ami ne and the precipi­ tation of plutonium as oxalate directly in the organic phase. The calcination of the oxalate led tn plutonium dioxide, the plutonium product form used at Euroche- mic, The TLA process was finally nel used in the plant. Plutonium precipitation box, with mixing pot and collection of plutonium oxalate in the bottom part.

The normal final uranium product at E ut ocherni < was a uranyl nitrate solution. We looked for a more advanced final product form arid invented a new process for the preparation of uranium tet raf luor ide and uranium dioxide directly from the uranyl nitrate solution via tin electrol y t ical I y produced U ( IV) nitrate. These two processes were superior to all processes known at thai lum- arid I suppose they are still the most adv iint r-d today . VS

1.4 Analytical Development

The last area of our development work concerns the control of the Purex process by analyses and in-line instruments as indicated b.-low:

- Development and testing of analytical methods. - Development of remotely operated equipment. - Automation of analytical proceuures. - Development of in-line instruments.

More than 300 analytical methods were tested or improved for the control of the va­ rious plant processes, the analysis of wast*? streams and the speci f iccit ion analyses of the uranium and plutonium final products. The most suited methods were then included in the Analytical Manual of the Eurochemic plant which today still consti­ tutes a valuable document.

One of the most interesting achievements concerns the development of laboratory equipment for the reriote analysis of highly active samples. The analytical building of the plant had a high-activity laboratory containing a chain of 26 boxes over a length of 36 m (see picture below). Thirteen boxes in this chain were shielded by lead bricks so that highly active samples could be handeld and analyzed. 76

Shielded boxes with remote handling tongs in analytical lab of plant.

These boxes were equipped with analytical apparatus specially designed for use with remote handling tongs, as vou can see in the above picture. The required analytical equipment has been designed, constructed, tested and finally installed in the plant laboratory exclusively by Eurochemic personnel. Astonishing is that the principal design work had been done by two persons only.

For the separations we mostly used chromatographic and solvent extraction methods. One of our equipment developments which has become quite famous is the Eurochemic remote pipetter. In the international literature, this pipetter, which has been used in the plant analytical laboratory for more than eight years, has become known as the 'calibrated stopcock". The remote pipettes known at that time, for example the Idaho pipetter, were very complicated and expensive. The Eurochemic pipetter is simple, reliable and of course cheap.

Some of the development stages of the pipette itself are shown in the following pic­ ture: the first row shows three horizontal pi pet tors, or - if you want - normal stop­ cocks; the bore hole of the stopcock determines the volume of the pipette. All these horizontal versions were not sufficiently tight; they all leaked after some time. The lower row shows vertical stopcock-;. With a certain trick, these pipetter heacJs are perfectly tight. Of course, for the remote pipetting one needs some arc e'.sorie-, for- it-, operation in a shielded box. As to the pipettm.j print ip'<-: The pipetter needle penetrates through the ' H'J:»-I' cap of the sample buttle and then into the solution which is sucked b\ ,t swinge into the vertical bore hole ni' ,1 i . •• Inn c y I i nder. 3\ turning the cylinder, the liquid in the calibrated :wr..- is transported to an outlet tube through >\ h ic h the -.ample aliquot can flov\ into a re<_ ept \on vessel -

WORKING SCHEME OF THE PIPETTING APPARATUS

vVdSh —to pump rea.^nt

200 i ii-, so ox A p.p.-tiitMi .ii'.'.tr.ilii'i

poiythpn** luliinq

-' • b<.r:lp

to dniil v ','•

1st posi tion (sample l;ikin

Some drvcinfimtTit s'f//;<\s of the Eurorhvmir pipetfer-, fff) : f hi fi h> >ri /ant .il f)ifte*tnrs: down : vert ie;t I stofxofk -. 76

Eurochemic's latest pipettor moorl (shown in the picture below) was used in a com- pletely automatized analytic.il facility in the research building. This facility, shown in the bottom picture, is called the Analytical Janus Cell; it is about 3 m long and could re­ place 13 shielded boxes of the plant laboratory. In this small cell all routine reprocessing analyses of highly active samples could be car­ ried out completely automatically and in a very short time, i.e. in minutes, when earlier hours were required.

I will finish the overview of the analytical work by presenting one of our nicest developments: a simple polyethylene tube of some meters length. Such a tube coated with a thin film of a suitable extradant allows to carry out selective and quantitative separations of any de­ sired element in solution. This fast and fully automatic device is not expensive at all.

Eurochemic's pipetter used in the Analytical Janus Cell. Such a chromatographic capillary extraction column is shown on next page in connection with the Euro- chemic pipetter and a titration unit. The capillary column was ma;nly used in connection with the deter­ mination of small amounts of ura­ nium and plutonium, but it can be universally employed. One has only to select the correct extradant and suitable aqueous phases. That's all.

I should not forget to mention that we developed all methods and equip­ ment necessary for the control of The Analytical Jantis Cv/1. the bi tumin izat ion process, among Chromatographic ajpillnry extraction column. cess, among others tho sampling and analysis of waste slurries containing up to 40% solids. The sampling box for- this vu a.-, to slurry analysis is shown in the picture on next page.

1,5 In-line Instruments

For the determination of uranium and plutonium in aqueous and organic process streams, various in-line instruments were developed until a stage at which they could be installed in the plant. Amori'i them: an X-ray and gamma ray absorpt iornc- ter, a colorimeter, a neutron monitor- arid an alpha monitor. 80

Finally, we demonstrated for the first time the continuous measurement of uranium by X-ray fluorescence under simu­ lated, but highly active conditions. For this pur­ pose, a special measur­ ing cell hjd to be con­ structed.

Unfortunately, only the alpha monitor has been installed in the plant. Already after some days of operation, this instru­ ment was hopelessly con­ taminated. And this was the end of the in-line instrument development at Eurochemic.

Today, I know there is nothing wrong with in­ line instruments, but many things can go Ritumen-slurry sampling box. wrong between a plant operator- and a research worker. They speak different languages and they are usuallv not too much inclined to learn to understand the language of the other. The a;>i>! i c at i on of in-line instruments in a rcprorc-.'-'inq plant is not a technical [ir-cih I < TTi, it is a communication problem, or mavbe even a problem of faith or confi-

CJ'TH <• .

Second R&D Period (1966-74)

Aft'" the commissioning of the plant, most of the earlier research staff assisted in lhe ;il mi operation, the process control and the analysis of the final products. In ••pile ef the reduced development crew - we were then about 25 technicians - re- r r •, i r • :• , li) le ar hi cvement s were made.

I it .i of all. the work on the use of urani urn I IV ) as a reductant for plutonium ,fieic! !,,• mentioned. We managed to prepare uran i uin( I V ) nitrate in nitric acid on 81

on an industrial scale. For this, an electroly t ical cell was designed and construct­ ed by Eurochemic, and was also patented. This cell has also been used in Japan.

Furthermore, we established the process conditions for the successful use of U(IV) in the plant. We assisted in the first test runs in the plant, and I remember that we worked for 36 hours without sleeping, but with quite some enthusiasm, in n\,r preparative work on U(IV) we could show that solid U(IV) nitrate does not exist. We thought, like many chemists before us, that the greyish green substance shown in the picture below had the formula U(N03)4. Such a crystalline compound does not exist, Mr. Chairman.* But we succeeded in preparing a double salt of U(IV) nitrate and hydrazinium dinitrate [ U( NO ) .M N H .2HNO ) .2H O] which is perfectly stable in air and which can be extremely useful in reprocessing and for other pur­ poses. Much development efforts were spent w on the recovery of by-products from -WïKvSSï i^^,,; .^:•'^C::.^;3I;"!;&«••^^Kk^^'}:î•>^• ...^ISS Purex process streams. I would like

!> ï to *;IM?? •?^ï&iar ^^iliSli^ mention the recovery of about 1,000 v \ v Ci Kr from the dissolver off-gas stream using a cryogenic method and 237 the isolation of about 250 g of Nip from the second uranium purification cycle.

Until the beginning of 1970, Euroche­ The greyish green substance which wan mic had accumulated a considerable thought to be U(IV) (N03i

The review on the development work would miss an important part if we would not mention the achievements in the field of extraction chromatogra­ phy.

Extraction chromatography K

UINQ3)I4.1, (N2Wi. 2IIN0V. 2H,?(')

()ni< shoul'l kii' I h.ii l hr • Ihi inn. m ni ' In- [i.i'i-ni l' r:ifi>in

by an inert granular material, serves as a stationary phase and a suitable aqueous solution as mobile phase. Using various extradants, we developed a one- cycle chromatographic Purex process, and a process for the recovery of uranium from homogeneous reactor fuels, this means from uranyl sulfate.

Furthermore, a process for the simultaneous recovery of uranium and plutonium from wastes originating from the fabrication of mixed oxide fuels was developed and suc­ cessfully tested with real waste. And we demonstrated successfully the practical quantitative removal of actinides from various waste solutions. At almost all waste management conferences it is discussed whether such a separation will be possible or not. It is possible. And finally, we used extraction chromatography for the chemical separation of uranium isotopes, i.e. for the enrichment of uranium.

Herewith I want to end my review of the R&D activities and achievements at Eurochemic.

3. Third R&D Period (1974-83)

About our very interesting R&D works on decontamination and the management of reprocessing wastes - which were carried out in the last period - Werner Hi Id and Jacques van Geel will report.

I would like to thank Or. Rudi Rometsch, for accepting the chairmanship of this session and for engaging me twenty years ago. My thanks go furthermore to the entire former and present research personnel, who did an excellent job. And final­ ly, I should not forget the quick and efficient assistance given to the researchers by the library and documentation services. Last but not least, I thank in the name of my colleagues the chairman and the members of the Technical Committee for their helpful support and acknowledgement of our development work, especially in our most difficult years, when quite some people considered R&D work as a luxury and thus superfluous.

I think we may conclude that the personnel of Eurochemic's research laboratory has made important contributions to the chemical reprocessing of irradiated fuels and that their R&D achievements have essentially contributed to the successful reprocessing and waste management activities at Eurochemic.

We all know that Eurochemic will soon die; but we hope that Eurochemic's experien­ ce will continue to live. 83

EUROCHEMIC PLANT OPERATION EXPERIENCE

B. Gustafsson and L. Geens

Before addressing this paper on plant operu. experience, I would like to intro­ duce my colleague, Louis Geens. I think he is one of the most experienced col­ leagues here in Eurochemic. He joined the Company in 1961. He has worked in R & D, commissioning of the plant, plant operation, decommissioning and now I hope in recomrnissioning of the plant.

When I was first asked to present a paper on the subject of plant operation expe­ rience, I considered it an ilmost impossible assignment to complete within the 15- 20 minutes allotted to me. I think you all realize that the experience gained during the nine years (1966-74) of active operation at Eurochemic, has yielded a great deal of knowledge.

I have chosen to summarize a few E u roc h cm i c publications and to refer to a papc- entitled "A General Review of Reprocessing Activities", written by Mr. E. Detilleuv and Mr. L. Geens, for further information, This short summary is obviously ad­ dressed mainly to colleagues who left Eurochemic some years ago and also proviues an opportunity for us to recall what we achieved together during what was a \ecy interesting and fascinating part of our professional lives.

During the period 1966-74, curochemic processed of the order of 181.5 tons of natu ral and low-enriched uranium, of which 95.5 tons were discharged from commercial power reactors. These activities permitted the separation of aboul G78 kg of pluto­ nium and 90 MCi of fission products. Eurochemic further processed 30.6 tons of ura­ nium-aluminium fuels from MTR reactors, containing about 1.36 tons of highly en- 23S riched uranium (69 to 92% U).

The main process features of the Eurochemic reprocessing plant are shown in table 1. As you can see, the Eurochemic plant used the classic Pu rex process as the se­ paration technique, toge'hor with a chemical decladding process. The main charac­ teristics of the reprocessed fuel are shown in table 2.

r>h',TH.l,EI'\', A. siri'J C.hl'.XS. L. Pvproi wism/; Activities at F,ur<>l Pe - "icw, Prr>rnvdintfs of ;i tri part tie svmfiosium on thr Pcpriicc-'sin)', nf Spent Xucle.ir Fuel, hehl ,it Mn! on M;iv 17-)'). l'ÏÏS. viliU',1 hy M. Xi-ve 'In Never,• n,<-;. P..:(•()'.,

TABLE 1 MAIN PROCESS FEATURES

i PARAMETERS FUELS 235 ' Enriched < 5% U | Highly enriched I 69% |

| 1. HEAD-END Decladding chemical - batchwise continuous dissolution, Core dissolution fumeless - batchwise Hg catalyzed I | 2. FEED CLARIFICATION centrifugation | centrifugation |

I | 3. EXTRACTION ' 3.1 Reagents I Extractant 30% TBP in kerosene | 5% TBP in kerosene | | Pu reductor U(NO-), | ferrosulphamate | 3.2 Cycles I Co-decontamination-partition pulsed columns | pulsed columns 1 2nd U cycle pulsed columns | pulsed columns | I 3rd U cycle none | mixer-settlers | | 2nd Pu cycle pulsed columns | none |

| 4. FINAL PRODUCTS

U UO_(N03)4 solution UOjNOJ solution j Pu Pu02 |

| 5. SOLVENT RECOVERY filtration and alcaline | filtration and alcaline washing in | washing in | mixer-settlers | mixer-settlers

| 6. ACID RECOVERY distillation - | distillation - evaporation | evaporation i 7. LIQUID WASTES High-level storage in liquid form storage in liquid form after concentration after concentration Intermediate level idem idem

Low-level release to river after release to river after chemical treatment chemical treatment 85

TABLE 2 MAIN CHARACTERISTICS OF REPROCISSED FUELS

1 1 Type of Reactor Canning Mat erial t U kg Pu Max . but si--up | MWd/t 1 1 1 —^ | GGR Al/Mg 10 13 1 ,500 i HWR Mg/Zy 70 106 15,000 i i | PWR SS/Zy 70 402 21,000

i BWR Zy 20 157 17,300 i | Blank et Rapsodie i i

180 678 i

1. Chemical Process

Head-end. Chemical decanning was adopted due to the fact that in the earl/ ;i*.

ties no mechanical system had been developed far enough for Eurochemic's purposes.

Even if such mechanical equipment had been available on the market, its usefuines: might have been doubtful due to the very large differences in sizes and geometrie; of the fuels reprocessed at Eurochemic.

The plant was equipped with three dissolvers: two batch dissolvors for fuels \.MV 235 an initial enrichment of up to 1.6% and 4.2% U and one semi-continuous di^solvet for MTR fuels. Table 3 shows the main da'a for the chemical decladding processe: employed.

TABLE 3 MAIN DATA OF CHEMICAL DECLADDING

| CLADDING REAGENTS hrt /b atch Waste produce d (m3/t) | min 1 max . min. max . average . 1 | Aluminium NaOH 7 1 12 1 .4 3.0 2.0 | I Magnesium H2S0A 9 | 23 2.0 2.7 2.6 6 22 4.0 6 4.4 | 1 ss H2S°4 1 • Zircaloy NH ,F - NH.N0, 7 1 54 3.0 11* 5.4 4 4 3 1 1 * Even for one batch 24 m3.

Al , Mg and stainless steel clad assemblies were easily reprocessed and almost

never caused any problems, in contrast to zircaloy clad assemblies. On the aver­

age, some 25% of the zircaloy cladding material remained undissolved, and conse­

quently some core material csci •jrd dissolution. The reason for this very poor clad­

ding dissolution might have been the highly chemically resi \,mt zirconium oxide 86

layer which due to the aqueous chemistry of the reactor was building up on the

fuel rods. It was noticed that the higher burn-up of the assemblies, the more diffi­

cult it was to dissolve the cladding. The cladding dissolution problem is very well

reflected in the average uranium and plutonium losses presented in table 4.

TABLE 4 U AND Pu LOSSES DURING SS AND ZIRCALOY DECLADDING

Losses in wt% of input |

Stainless steel Zircaloy

| Uranium 0.1-0.3% 1.4-2.0% |

| Plutonium 0.2-0.6% 1.9-2.1% |

Another drawback of the Zirflex process stemmed from the fact that the ammonia

vapours emitted during tr -• decladding operation reacted with the nitric acid always

present in the vessel ventilation system and were deposited in the exhaust filters.

The mechanical process used today, called "chop and leach", certainly has many

advantages over the chemical decladding, especially in combination with present-

day standardization of commercial power producing fuel assemblies.

The drawbacks of chemical decladding can be summarized as follows: large volumes

of liquid waste; time consuming process; risk of high losses of fissile materials.

Dissolution of uranium metal/oxide. Core dissolution never caused any particular

problems and was not a capacity limiting factor in the plant. When recycled nitric

acid containing fissile materials was used, accountability sometimes became some­

what complicated, and there was a potential risk that degradat;on products origi­

nating from entrained organic solution might be recycled to the acid recovery eva­

porator.

No particular problems were encountered in the off-gas treatment, perhaps because

of the processing of highly decayed and/or low burn-up fuels. Due to these factors, 131 129 85 releases of I and I were very low. Releases of Kr were also very low, 85,. owing to the relatively low capacity of the plant. The yearly stack releases of "'Kr

and tritium are given in table 5.

Feed clarification. More or less as a rule, the dissolver solution was clarified by centrifugation before plutonium valence adjustment took place. The capacity of the centrifuge was of the order of 0.5 t/h of uranium. At certain intervals, the centrifuge bowl was rinsed with concentrated hot nitric acid. After recovery of fis­ sile material, the remaining solid/slurry was routed to intermediate liquid waste storage. The performance of the centrifuge must be regarded as very good. 37

TABLE 5 YEARLY STACK RELEASE OF Kr AND TRITIUM

1 YEAR 85Kr Tritium |

(Ci) (Ci) !

1 1971 126,441 532 * |

1972 199,600 706

| 1973 216,730 1,893 |

1974 100,230 1,579

I Auth or zed 6 6 I year iy release 6.3-10 4.4-10 | i i * Measured during 3 months only.

Extraction. The co-decontamination and partitioning cycle (Fig. 1) consisted of

five air-pulsed columns: HA, HS, IBX, IBS and 1C. In general, it can be said that

the operation of this cycle took place without major problems. The decision to modi­

fy the HA and HS columns in order to operate them with bottom interface was a suc­

cess, since no operation difficulties were encountered due to crud accumulation.

During the first period of operation (about two years), ferrosu Iphamate was used as a plutonium reducing agent in the IBX column. During most of the operating pe­ riod, U(IV) nitrate obtained by electrolytic reduction of recycled uranium was useci as a reducing agent. Since the IBX column was originally designed to operate with ferrosulphamate, and due to the differences in the kinetics of thr plutonium redac­ tion reactions by Fe and U(IV), the efficiency of the IBX column with U(IV) nitrate was rather poor, requiring U(IV)/Pu molar ratios as high as 10.

It was also noticed that the efficiency of the 1C column was lower when reprocess­

ing high burn-up fuels, due to the presence of a greater amount of degradation

products.

The second uranium cycle (Fig. 2) consisted of two air-pulsed columns (2D extrac­

tion-double acidity scrub and a uranium stripping column 2E ) . The 2D column was

operated with a bottom interface and the 2E with a top interface. The results clear­

ly demonstrated that a third uranium cycle would be needed to reprocess high

burn-up fuels in order to achieve required product specifications (alpha as well

as beta/gamma).

Very often, uranium had to be recycled in order to meet product specifications, which naturally reduced the throughput of the plant. It should be mentioned, that on several occasion, the final uranium purification step on a "aiica gel bed helped us to achieve the product specifications. The U/Pu separation f.irtor and the ur.ini as OB FIGURE 1 - FIRST EXTRACTION CYCLE

CAM»» lb II IIU 1» -SV. U j^CYClt o—> 23b|-l W 7 i-l A. < T11 > f Lin T S*\ tl • i O—KjJ t G)™""* IL— 2BXW

StftfAM \ 1 J 4 » • " « » 10 u iî u H 1» H IT il 1* JO II

OtSCRIPlION H»F MM HAS HAW HAP !•««, MÎS IlIKj IflRM lilM «•SA 1»SP ICI icur 1CW ICUO ICUW ICUO ICUA ICUC

ri»» I/o .5.6 164L .25 25 172 2.5 1b 2.b 14 22 1 20 1*4 194 194 168 1b 20 1 3b. b U 20' n3 vlOO rp •' -• — . _ — . . . _. ._ . HjO 1 C ? . -- -

_".»"» - * 0.2 <-» 0.2 0.H 0.1b *-» • _ 2 1»P 't. 3 30 30 o •J «J f *l JS«C 0.82 TT u) a di s/m tn.gr.U _. l.b* 0' 1 .bx) i' -—, ...... •- - FIGURE 2 - SECOND EXTRACTION CYCLE

CAMPAIGN IfU li SV. rtowsHfti tiu 74/4

T • Critical safe limits ; Hemdrks : Pu reductions to be done in 2 steps. à) N.H.NO, addition TO W ^® 232-12 . 223-6B '

b) U (IV) addition ^^irn p| Q | r~n 232-4 • 252-1 U t 675 g/1. @—W] W | »| J 23J-? • 2*2-1 __t JfT^; J f 232-4 • 241-2A/B,

1*1- I ti

SI M AM u ii it » » Of SCMIP1ION mor J Of J BIS 2 OSA J OP 30W «W i I» 1IUA 1«U» Ht» f

FI» 3/ 175 25 1B0 b2 175 190 190 17 1 20 38 172 U *" 430.. 415 «5 cO.b <0.1 HO 480 MNO) 0.2 0.5 0.5 l.ü 0.3b 0.01 1.5 .2 Pu mg/1 /» C«M fiC

MjO I 3

IBP V. 30 30 30 ? é> 1S*C Votum* I 40Û F P 0.1 ^i«» M Q.15 'J* *#< 'm.rt /§ 1.S.A1Ü ' Jl.^ln L^JLLIL Uulk

CO o 90

urn decontamination factors are given in table 6, while the achieved uranium final product specifications are given in table 7.

TABLE 6 URANIUM DECONTAMINATION FACTORS

U/Pu Zr-Nb Ru Separation factor Decontamination factor Decontamination factor | Average I fuel | burn-up 1st 2nd 1st 2nd * | 1st 2nd cycle cycle Total cycle cycle | Total cycle cycle Total

2 2 5 i 6,000 5 -10 6-10 3-10S 103 3-103 | 3-106 103 102 io 1 i 14,600 2-102 io3 2-105 7-103 40 | 2.8-106 io4 70 7-105

| 21,000 102 1.5-103 1.5.105 5-103 25 | 1.25-105 ioA 2-102 2-106

Including percolation through one Si02 column.

TABLE 7 URANIUM FINAL PRODUCT SPECIFICATIONS

| Average fuel burn--up alpha FP in % of activity of | dpm/gU aged natural uranium |

| 6,000 2-103 - 8*103 < 100 |

| 14,000 2M03 - 8*103 £145 | 4 4 I 21 ,000 1*10 - 3*10 < 100 |

| Official spec f ications 100 |

During the first four years of operation, the 2nd plutonium cycle consisted of two geometrically safe mixer-settler batteries for extraction-scrubbing and stripping. Electrically heated evaporators were used to concentrate entering and leaving plu­ tonium streams. The same equipment was also used for a final uranium purification cycle in the processing of MTR fuels. Unfortunately, it was almost never possible to achieve sufficient equipment purity to permit its efficient use for either plutoni­ um or uranium final purification, for which reason it was decided to install a new plutonium purification unit (Fig. 3) independent of MTR reprocessing. This modifica­ tion also eliminated the use of plutonium evaporators.

The new unit consisted of three pulsed columns: 2A, 2BX and 2BS (see fig. 3). The 2A was an extraction-scrub column; the 2BX a plutonium back-extraction column FIGURE 3 - SECOND PLUTONIUM EXTRACTION CYCLE

mwt» ifu • » • v.. riowMCt au 74/4 92

using U(IV) as a reducing agent and the 2BS an aqueous plutonium stream scrub column in which excess uranium remaining in the aqueous plutonium stream was back-extracted with a fresh organic phase.

3y the use of the reflux extraction flowsheet, in which a fraction cf the plutonium coming out of the 2BS column was recycled back to the feed of the 2A column, an increase of plutonium concentration was achieved, keeping the plutonium inventory in the cycle at a constant level, regardless of the plutonium concentration in the stream (1BSP) coming out of the first partitioning cycle.

The introduction of this new cycle was a success and proved to be very efficient for fission product decontamination, while also permitting a very high plutonium capacity for the plant. The plutonium decontamination factors are given in table 8.

TABLE 8 PLUTONIUM DECONTAMINATION FACTORS

1 1 1 1 | U/Pu Separation | Zr/Nb DF | Ru OF |

FUEL | 1 1 1 1 1 1 II 1 |2nd extr. Iprecip. | Ç |2nd extrj | s 12nd extr.| | Ç MWd/t | cycle | 1 | cycle | | | cycle | |

6,000 | 2 | 4'^2 | 8-10" | 2*102 | 2 | 4'102 j 35 | 40 | 1.2#103

14,000 '| 0.5M03 | 2'102 | 1 -105 | 40 | 3 | 1.2'102 | 1.1M02 | 15 | 1.6'103

21,000 '| 103 | 3*102 1 3'105 | 45 | 2 | 90 | 2.2'102 | 10 | 2.2'103

(1) Reflux flowsheet used.

Plutonium dioxide production. The plutonium dioxide preparation unit (Fig. 4) con­ sisted of a glass precipitator in which plutonium oxalate was produced by mixing the plutonium nitrate solution with oxalic acid and using a filtration unit to sepa­ rate the plutonium oxalate slurry from the mother liquor. The equipment also in­ cluded an electrically heated slurry dryer, followed by a calcination furnace and a plutonium dioxide homogenization and sampling unit. All of these items of equip­ ment were housed in a glove box type enclosure.

This part of the plant constantly caused certain problems as regards regular main­ tenance, good housekeeping and radiation doses to the operating personnel. These problems can be summarized as follows: - plutonium oxide powder production during the various handling steps down­ stream of the dryer resulted in heavy contamination of the internal surface and accumulation of plutonium powder in tho absolute filters; FIGURE A - SECOND PLUTONIUM CYCLE - DRY PART

CHEMICAL FLOWSHEET N«*~C-IHM 2ni1 f\j I.YCIE DBV PAHT

Mk ->!3) ,. @^3^ 1 1 1 • 1 L-^^l M TT ISAM PU N& 1 c ) 1 ® T r*- u U If> •' li From 2411-2 f\^\^^A/yj ® G*I 12.) • U °T L^il 1! LI ÜIANCS ©-@^?J-,_,p_Jl ,

>l,ijy/1J m STUf »M t » i i. 5 to . • 4 to i * u j u '4 It t T ia '» J'I J' u n 24 <_ z> CO0i*;c*r<0N • à' 3AFR us i»^>» u« IM4 Mm 3»« KP O ( > UW' li ; in 11*1 ?>»j MI C

FLOW I • h O INM t SlllC Al I T 1 LiMi IS 10 5.7 5 2 20.7 J O u~l O >U. II i«.iu.»?iii J- ?•>! »» * 20 »" '" •»*0j M 2.75 1.7£ 0.5 2.5 2.6 2 S VOLUME 1 2381-2 . 2391-1B « 20 g/1 > U u., >'j. i '.tl on. c x o-JO f>u j/l 16 u o •-» 0.5 0.5 U O- • ëë 3.10 ' • *< ex * 50 a— o :» 3 «c *« T- t 50 130 200 340 340 M,CjQ M ; v 0.6 0.07 1

I'S UI 94

- high radiation level in the processing of plutonium separated from high burn-up fuels, occurred mainly in connection with manual handling of products and maintenance operations.

In spite of these problems, product specifications were achieved and the product was acceptable for further use by fuel fabricators. Table 9 presents a few of the results obtained.

TABLE 9 PLUTONIUM FINAL PRODUCT SPECIFICATIONS

1 wt% Pu in Pu02 U (ppm) FP UCi/g) | 1 1 1 6,000 86.5-87 .8 220 8 I 14,000 87 20-500 8 I I 21 ,000 87.5 50 5 I 1 1 I Official specifications 86 300 8 I 1

2. Other Units

As you all know, a reprocessing plant also includes a number of other processes, such as solvent recovery, intermediate storage of high-level waste, acid recovery, different types of waste treatment, and so on, all of which must achieve good per­ formance in order to ensure the high nominal and stable capacity of the reprocess­ ing plant. Unfortunately, time does not allow me to enter into any discussion of these parts of the Eurochemic reprocessing plant. For anyone interested, I can re­ commend the excellent general review I referred to in my introduction.

3. Conclusion

I do not think it is necessary to draw any technical conclusions from the Euroche­ mic operation experience, since it is now internationally known that the Eurochemic plant is a success. It is my opinion that all of you here today, as well as other colleagues not present, whj contributed to this success, should feel very proud of your work. 95

EUROCHEMIC EXPERIENCE IN PROCESS CONTROL AND SAFEGUARDS ANALYSES

R. Berg and H. Bokelund

Inexperienced in reprocessing, inexperienced in international cooperation, inexpe­ rienced in nuclear chemistry, lacking the necessary command of the languages spoken, coming from nine different nations, these were the starting conditions for the Analytical Laboratory Division of Eurochemic. Today, any one of these condi­ tions would make licensing for hot operation impossible. What we brought with us was knowledge in different fields, enthusiasm to implement it, and what helped us tremendously was the warm and friendly acceptance of the host country.

As it turned out later, excellent human relationships within the ALD turned into lasting friendships, and this was certainly also an important factor in support of ourselves. The laboratory succeeded in answering most of the questions asked, cer­ tainly the important ones, contrary maybe to belief and expectations.

The successful experiences are published (about 20 ETR's and some 30 lectures and other publications were produced by the ALD staff), known and in many cases im­ plemented worldwide. Details cannot be given here. So, rather than summarizing known facts, we will try to highlight some of the major events and stress the most important experiences, this for the benefit of coming generations of reprocessrrs. The following points will be treated: personnel organization, laboratory layout, methods, equipment and safeguards analyses.

1. Personnel Organization

Based on American advice, the ALD was organized in four groups: shift, spectro­ metry, special analysis, and quality control. This organization turned out to function well and is now found, with minor modifications, all over the world.

We started correctly with the right number of experts planning and operating the laboratory, but we certainly started wrongly with too few operators doing the anal­ ytical determinations. The hot startup with 26 persons taught the management that our request for additional personnel was justified, it also taught plant operation to optimize their sampling requests, it taught all of us that intensive cooperation and information exchange between departments are basic requirements for an opti­ mal operation of the plant. The ALD personnel was finally brought to a necessary 96

36, which permitted us to cope with most of the analytical requirements. But allow us a small remark for the future: 36 analysts will not be sufficient to run an identical plant today. Since 1974, a number of requirements have been put forward, with a severe influence on analytical load.

The throughput of 1,100 determinations per man and per year that we reached was slightly above normal at that time, considering the fact that we had to cope with some rather difficult analyses.

We would like to compliment those who designed the plant. The optimal engineering certainly made Eurochemic worldwide the reprocessing plant needing the smallest number of analysts to operate.

2. Laboratory Layout

Luckily, the designers of this plant cleveriy overestimated the number of analysts. If I recall corrpctly, they anticipated about 90 analysts in full operation. As a consequence, laboratory space was more than adequate. The layout, with one excep­ tion, was very good and permitted flexibility in adapting to new problems.

The one exception, the alpha-lab, turned out to be too small for plutonium oxide handling and plutonium process control. And moreover, this laboratory was really too hot for work in Summer days.

3. Methods

About 100 methods are described in the three volume Eurochemic Analytical Manual. It would be impossible to discuss any methods here in detail, so let us look at some typical Eurochemic features:

Aluminium decladding (Al + Hg; Al + OH ) Aluminium-uranium alloys (Al + Hg) Zirflex (Zr - F - NH* - N0~) Sulfex (Fe - Cr - Ni - 50^) Magnesium decladding (Mg) LEU-HEU alternating

The falling drops density measurement method, necessary for hot solutions, became obsolete overnight when we discovered the vibrating capillary densitometry, A small Austrian firm revolutionized the input determination with this equipment. It was small, cheap and extremely accurate. We were the first to use it remotely. The whole world has copied us. 97

The chemical decladdirg presented us with a number of analytical problems. Bal­ ancing uranium and plutonium was one problem, another was the determination of fluoride. Many years of our work or the pyrolytic fluoride separation, including a glove box full of complicated equipment became obsolete with the ion-sensitive electrode. We were the first to apply that method in a hot environment, as we were the first to use atomic absorption in reprocessing analysis, a technique which is now universally used.

We did not discover the plutonium isotope 238, but thanks to the high burn-ups that we handled, we were the first cies to take it into account in commercial négo­ ciations with the customers. And fu"ther we were the first plant in the world to adopt high-resolution semi-conductor detectors for alpha and gamma spectroscopy. This was necessary because of the variety of fuels and large fluctuations in iso- topic composition, the variety of burn-ups and different cooling times.

And of course, a typical Eurochemic speciality which presented many headaches and problems was the alternating, the switching from low-enriched to high-enriched ura­ nium flowsheets.

4. Equipment

A few words on our equipment philosophy. The famous high- and medium-active bo* chain with its wonderful intervention zone contained relatively small boxes oper­ ated with tongs, which had a severe impact on the equipment. Contrary to the big cell philosophy with master-slave manipulators, this forced us to construct new or modi'y existing equipment to perform optimally. As it turned out, a proper box in- sta'lation is of tremendous importance for optimum operation. Today, we would pre­ fer somewhat larger boxes, operated with manipulators, but equipped in the same way as the Eurochemic boxes were.

During operation, the following new techniques, having an important impact on the equipment, were implemented:

- controlled potential coulometry; - vibrating capillary densitometry; - ion-sensitive electrodes; - semi-conductor detectors for high-resolution alpha and gamma spectroscopy; - computers.

5. Safeguards Analyses

Our "accountability analyses" - the phrase "safeguards analyses" was coined later, probably at the Karlsruhe safeguards symposium in 1970 - were based on published 98

methods, mostly of US origin. They represented the state-of-the-art at that time and formed the basis for accounting towards the customer, ensuring criticality safety in the plant en serving as a basis for safeguarding purposes.

If we compare the methods we used in 1970 with those of today, only minor changes will be observed. The most important ones are found in instrumentation performance and reliability. These two facts are leading to the observed improvements in accu­ racy, precision and speed of reporting.

If the term "timely detection" had been quantified during the operation of Euro- chemic, we probably would not have been able to cope with this requirement, be­ cause even at the C3NM at that time, they were working in the opposite direction: high speed, no accuracy; no speed, high accuracy. The first humble steps in speeding up analysis and data handling was taken when the PDP-8 computer was installed in the women's change room. She soon became the second most adored lady in the laboratory.

The importance of the volume concentration input determination is Known to you. Less known are probably the difficulties we experienced in 1970 with the delivery of the all important spikes U and Pu, because of the Carter policy in the United States. This fact initiated the preparation of European spikes, now available to the Community from the CBNM here at Geel. The idea of common certified spike solutions for European laboratories gives increased confidence in the analytical de­ terminations. We also felt, at Eurochemic, the lack of realistic isotopic standards for plutonium. Today they are availablp rrom the CBNM.

The important isotope dilution input determination, the only method available at that time to us, led to the idea of "independent" verification. The now accepted technique of isotope correlation was developed simultaneously at Eurochemic and at Battelle in Richland, Washington.

Examples of various verification relations between measured isotope values and initial fuel data are given below. Verifications based on measured values only are also possible. A third type can check the total amount of uranium or plutonium, a method which is independent of the volume measurement. Eurochemic was again 148 pioneering, measuring Nd routinely as a burn-up monitor.

For highly enriched uranium, a speciality of Eurochemic, these checks are particu­ larly precise. This is demonstrated in Figure 1 (p. 100). The difference between two reactors is clearly seen, and with this type of verifications, the problems caused by the continuous dissolution could be solved. The splitting of the valuable material between two customers was based on such checks. 99

EXAMPLES OF VERIFICATION RELATIONS

RELATION | FUEL TYPE j pf^'^ 1

! wc ! ! ! 6 | W2/Wc = a + b . | HEU | Wc | 1 «s ; | i | Pu/U = b (W° - W ) | LEU i r-u/U |

W, = a - bWc i HEU | Wc | 1 1

I Wg = a + bWQ | LEU | W9 |

| W5 = a + bWg | LEU | W& j

I U°/U = 1 + Pu/U + FP/U | LEU | U |

W is weight fraction of isotope x. Subscripts 5, 6, 9 and 0 refer

*235,, 236,, 239n 240_ _ . . n . , ^ t to U, U, Pu, Pu. Superscript 0 refers to value before ir­ radiation.

A further verification originated at Eurochemic. The independent verification of the 7 input using a tracer added to the input tank was tried. Li was added in a known quantity to the tank, and using Li as a spike, the total tank content could be measured by mass spectrometry. We succeeded on a laboratory scale, but we had a bias when trying to implement this technique on a plant level. This technique is still of interest for safeguards today, although other pairs of isotopes are being considered.

Compared to the complex input determination, the accurate output determination of uranium and plutonium was less complicated. Gravimetric and electromechanical methods with a high precision (0.08% for U and 0.1% for Pu) were available. Due to the fact that these methods were time consuming, verification possibilities were also wanted here. As it turned out, uranium, H and density correlates extremely well, as is shown below.

VERIFICATION OF URANIUM IN URANYL NITRATE

1 U 749.2 (752 + 23.28 [H 1) }20 Number of pairs: 17 Average difference: 0.060 g/kg In % of average uranium : 0.028 Concentration range: 104 - 284 g U/kg

Standard deviation: 0.5 g U/kg 95% confidence level for average difference: 0,26 g U/kg 100 101

Adding a burn-up term to correct for the presence of plutonium and fission products this verification can also be used on a feed solution. Here the precision and accu­ racy deteriorates somewhat, probably due to uncertainties in the acid determination.

Even if we verified and applied stringent quality controls and used the best methods available, we could not avoid numerous accountability follow-up meetings. In these meetings "missing" fissile material was looked for, theories were brought forward and rejected, actions were planned and executed both in the plant and in the analytical laboratory at that time, all in vain.

When modern techniques were available to measure the plutonium lost to solid waste non-destructively, again we advocated international collaboration. A substantial amount of plutonium could be identified. Today, the material unaccounted for (MUF) is 0.5% for HEU, 0.19% for LEU and 1.18% for plutonium. We believe that the latter figure might change when Alona has treated the Pu-contami nated solid waste by acid diaestion. These values are up to the standards of today.

The international character of the company fostered an open atmosphere and result­ ed in a number of international inter-laboratory experiments. A steady stream of visitors from all over the world led to valuable contacts with important information exchange. Many of these contacts are still existing today.

Those who have had the privilege of building up and operating the Eurcchemic analytical laboratory will never forget the enthusiasm and collaboration prevailing in these truly pioneering years. It was a hell of a plant. It was a magnificent crew operating it.

103

SAFEGUARDS EXPERIENCE GAINED AT EUROCHEMIC

E. Van der Stijl

I feel honoured to be invited at the seminar as a kind of outsider, outsider in the sense that I have never been employed by Eurochemic, contrarily to most of the other speakers. At the same time I am feeling like coming back at a family meeting where even stepsons are welcome. And I would like to congratulate Eurochemic with the initiative to gather everybody involved in the suspicious field of chemical re­ processing.

Last week, I gave a lecture at a safeguards course in I spra, where I mentioned my personal view why reprocessing is considered to be something particular. The main reason, for me at least, is that the physicists who developed nuclear energy at the time looked with a very suspicious eye at their chemical colleagues. They did not quite understand what they were "cooking", but on the other hand they needed their skill. Often I have the feeling that this suspicion is still quite alive.

Now, coming to the subject of my talk today, I dare say that the way of safe­ guarding of reprocessing facilities in the whole world is and was applied following the example and pattern of Eurochemic. The first real campaign at Eurochemic con­ sisted of EL-3 fuel of US origin. This leased material could only be reprocessed outside the United States with the prior consent of the US government. We learned yesterday that diplomatic problems arose from the fact that no safeguards agreement existed between the European Nuclear Energy Agency and the USA. Fortunately, this could be overcome by channelling the safeguards aspects of the matter through the Euratom-USA agreement for cooperation. Thus, before this EL-3 campaign started, a planeload of Europeans flew out to Washington, to convince the Americans of our good faith. The delegation succeeded in this goal. The USA agreed to let the Eura­ tom Commission perform the safeguards in lieu of USAEC inspectors, with the under­ standing that continuous inspection, i.e. seven days a week and 24 hours a day would be performed. And I'm afraid that we still live in the same scheme today, although we no longer speak of continuous inspection, but give preference to the wording of "cortinuous availability of inspectors". This means that inspectors stay near the facility and can come at any time when their presence is needed, e.g. to be present at measurements at key measurement points. In fact, to the best of my knowledge, full time international safeguards was applied for the first time in a reprocessing facility here at Mol, on the 23rd of January 1967, and I can even 104

give you the hour, because I checked the logbook we kept at the time. For those who appreciate exact information, we started at 10 o'clock a.m.

The details for the implementation of the agreement we wrote with the US were to be worked out by the Joint Technical Working Group in the framework of the US- Euratom agreement for cooperation. On the European side procedures had to be made. After some briefing by the CEA, Euratom inspectors and the Eurochemic mana­ gement set together to work out the system.

Although! I do not intend to mention names in this context, which would take me about the rest of this morning, I would like to make one exception. We were told yesterday that sampling facilities at all places were made at the request of Mr. Barendregt. In fact, Dr. Barendregt, better known as Teun, sacrified much of his precious time to talk with the inspectors and to explain the workings of the facili­ ties, although his prime responsibility was to survey the construction and the startup of the facility. His constant worry for good safeguards and non-prolifera­ tion has been of high value to us. And I consider it a pity that in his and my home country his good faith on non-proliferation is put into doubt, although he might be one of the few who understand what safeguards means. I would like to stress that this last paragraph expresses a -'ery personal feeling and does not bind anyone else.

The title of my talk is safeguards experience gained at Eurochemic. This experience should be subdivided in two parts, the first being the egocentric Euratom part, which gave us the opportunity to build up a system for safeguards. The little sen­ tence of article 78, 2nd paragraph of the Euratom Treaty states that the chemical processes used in reprocessing irradiated fuel have to be approved by the Commis­ sion. This was worked out into a three step procedure, requiring close contacts with the operator.

The same applies for the instructions given to the inspectors in the field. This could only be performed thanks to the constant interest and help of the operator.

It should be noted that the system of nuclear material accountancy and the way returns should be made for safeguards were hardly known for bulk facilities. Other items like calibration, recal ibration, etc., were worked out in the time before con­ tinuous safeguards started. Moreover, Euratom was using Eurochemic to an extended way to train inspectors with the full consent of the operator. We are very gratefu\ for this opportunity. It should also be mentioned that the high variety of fuel (from natural uranium to highly enriched MTR fuel) gave us a big and valuable experience, which was applied at other facilities. I may say that at least inside the European Community the smooth implementation of = ifeguards in reprocessing facilities could only be executed through .ho experience gained in Mol. 105

The early cooperation with the control group of the European Nuclear Energy Agency of which Eurochemic is a daughter was a typical example of the symbiosis of inter­ national safeguards bodies. I'm very lucky to say that we have the same spirit of cooperation with the Vienna Agency now.

The second part of the experience is at least as important and presents a typical example of cross-fertilization. Many persons coming from Eurochemic entered in ma­ terial management jobs and/or in international safeguards positions, even at the highest level. I have only to look at this session's chairmen. This way, the cops and robbers play showed remarkable changes of the cast.

From my own experience, I can assure you that in numerous cases the Eurochemic spirit has saved many situations, which for political reasons could have given rise to collisions. In the case of reprocessing facilities, the implementation of safe­ guards in the framework of the Verification Agreement between the IAEA and Eura­ tom went smoothly, due to the fact that - and forgive me that I'm again looking at our chairman - he looked down on us from the Olympus, and above all that we were speaking the same language on both sides, and even in many other cases from three sides of the table, i.e. the Eurochemic talk.

This brings me to another spin-off of Eurochemic. The management of several facili­ ties originated from it. Needless to say that this phenomenon helped very much to smoothen contacts.

Another very important item is the verification of data. The Euratom laboratories and "'.mong those, the one where we are today, get valuable experience on analyz­ ing active samples originating from Eurochemic.

I would like to finish with a remark I had intended to begin with. We had all a feeling of coming home again today, and we saw the changed world of Mol. About fifteen years ago, you could have put me blindfolded anywhere in a radius of about 20 km from Mol, and I would have found my wty within a nanosecond. Today I almost got lost at less than one mile from here.

Thomas Wolfe, the American author of many patriotic books, who nevertheless got most of his inspiration during his stays in Europe, tells us that "you can never come home again, thr- home of everyone is in the future, there is no other way".

Let us hope that we all at this seminar will maintain the good will to work to­ gether and have nuclear industry developed in a peaceful and safeguarded world.

107

DECONTAMINATION, DECOMMISSIONING AND WASTE MANAGEMENT AT EUROCHEMIC

W. Hild

Recalling that some of you had pleasure in graduating me as "Eurogarbage man", "Eurobi tuminix", "Friendly Euro-undertaker" and whatever intuitive title, I worried whether most of you would not proceed to a prolonged interim recreation phase in­ stead of listening to boring talks about the very end of the nuclear fuel cycle's tail-end. Thank you for being a retreivable audience, that did not isolate me here at speaker's corner.

As announced, I am supposed to talk about our D Ft D and waste management works, being the essential activities carried out after the shutdown of the plant. As Mr. Detilleux gave you already an excellent description yesterday, I will limit my presentation to a short description of some of the practical experience gained in this field since 1975, and will illustrate this by showing you a few slides, some of which will certainly remind one or the other of you of your own active coopera­ tion at Eurochemic.

After the shutdown of the plant, a D & D programme was carried out, comprising a remote rinsing phase to remove and recover most of the fissile material that was still distributed in the equipment of the plant. This phase was followed by a re­ mote chemical decontamination, mainly aiming at the removal and washing out of fission products, to obtain a drastic decrease of the radiation and contamination to levels that would allow the direct access to the process cells and their equip­ ment in the third phase of the programme. In this phase, cells and equipment were first inspected and surveyed for residual radiation and contamination. Then hot spots were removed from the equipment by direct decontamination, using special de­ contamination loops, different high-pressure water jets and manual operations. In the same phase, some obsolete equipment was dismantled. Finally, all external sur­ faces of the cells and their equipment were decontaminated.

When planning the D & D programme, these three phases were considered an essen­ tial preliminary to all further activities, regardless whether the plant would be dismantled or brought back online after refurbishing. Indeed, the present status of the main plant allows to carry on safely the lengthy interventions required to achieve either of these aims. ÏOB

Mainly mild Purex type chemicals were selected as decontamination reagents for the remote rinsing and decontamination phase in order to prevent corrosion. Alternating chemical attack was applied by using for instance caustic after acid rinsings and reducing after oxidizing rinsing conditions. Efficient contact between the decontami­ nation solutions and the internal surfaces of 'he equipment was aimed at and hea» was applied whenever possible. The efficiency of the decontamination was followed by extensive sampling and analysis, and by scanning the radiation at the entrance doors to the ce! Is.

In spending roughly 40,000 manhours during about 2 years, more than 140,000 Ci of beta activity, representing about 0.1% of the plant input, 390 kg of uranium, equal to roughly 0.2% of the plant input, and 3,870 g of plutonium, or about 0.57% of the plant input have been washed out. After partial recovery of the fissile ma­ terial, the 370 m3 of decontamination solutions were evaporated to 70 m3 of interme­ diate level liquid waste concentrates, that have been conditioned by homogeneous incorporation into bitumen.

Some 40 cells, intervention areas and operational zones with a total volume of roughly 25,000 m3 were decontaminated in direct interventions. At the same time, partial decommissioning was carried out by dismantling parts or the totality of two dissolvers, an evaporator, a mixer-settler and a couple of obstructed steam jets and lines. To reach the present general accessibility, roughly 73,000 manhours were spent during the years 1975-80, at a total dose commitment of 130 manrem.

D tt D works in the fuel reception and storage building comprised mainly:

sorting, segregating and conditioning of solid wastes stored in the water ponds, especially in the solid waste pond;

repacking of some 25 m3 of high-level solid waste into stainless steel canis­ ters for continued underwater storage;

emptying and decontamination of the four ponds with about 2,500 m3 total volume and decommissioning of some underwater equipment;

decontamination and conservation of all other facilities.

This work took about 82,000 manhours during the years 1975-79, at a total dose commitment of 171.5 manrem.

In the ventilation building D & D comprised mainly decontamination works in the various rooms, including some minor dismantlings and the decontamination and con­ servation of the ventilation ducts and filter casings. Up till now, the exhaust ducts of the main plant and the fuel element reception and storage building are deconta­ minated anr conserved by painting. By the way, they are all in an excellent state. This was quite a suprise. Decontamination is still in progress i (> the ducts of the 109

process control laboratory, where some corrosion has been detected. Works took roughly 5,500 manhours during the years 1978-83, at a total dose commitment of 8.2 manrcm.

In the process control laboratory D & D works comprised mainly the decontamination and conservation of the shielded glove box chain, of the glove boxes for alpha emitters and of the special glove boxes. Furthermore, all chemical laboratories, their accessories and the utility rooms were decontaminated, cleaned and conserved. The works took roughly 11,000 manhours during the years 1975-80, at a total dose commitment of 13.6 manrem.

By the way, about 14% of the manpower was spent by health and safety personnel in surveillance and ass,stance operations.

Turning to the waste production, we see that during the main D & D works roughly 170 m3 of intermediate level liquid waste concentrates were produced; they were so­ lidified onsite by homogeneous incorporation into bitumen. 70 m3 of this amount came from the rinsing and remote decontamination operations; 100 m3 came from the direct decontamination operations in all the buildings, especially in the fuel recep­ tion and storage building.

In addition, about 25,000 m3 of so-called warm waste, with beta activities below 30 MCi/l and some 35,000 m3 of so-called cold waste, with beta activities below 0.1 yCi/l were pumped to the waste treatment facilities of the Belgian Nuclear Re­ search Centre (SCK/CEN) for decontamination by chemical f locculat ion.

Roughly 700 m3 of low-level combustible solid waste and about 450 m3 of low-level non-jombustible waste were shipped to the SCK/CEN for conditioning in view of sea dumping. In addition, Eurochemic has also conditioned some 340 m3 of low-level solid waste according to NEA guide lines for sea dumping. Finally, we have condi­ tioned some 18 m3 of intermediate level solid waste for interim storage onsite, in the bunkers of the Eurostorage facility for the bituminized intermediate level waste.

I would like to draw your attention to the fact that only a rather small volume of intermediate level solid waste was produced in our D & D works. This is a con­ sequence of the fact that stainless steel equipment of reprocessing plants can effec­ tively be decontaminated, provided the surfaces are smooth and easily accessible. Problems arise only with parts contaminated by solids like solvert degradation pro­ ducts heavily loaded with fission products and/or alpha emitters and fines from the fuel dissolution residues. Indeed, the intermediate; level wastes did mainly con­ tain such contaminations and also considrruble amounts of activation products from fuel element cladding and structural material. On the other hand, most of the dis­ mantled equipment had been •-;<> effectively decontaminated, that it fell into the low- 110

level waste category and could thus be disposed of by sea dumping. This is an­ other evidence that decontamination does not only facilitate decommissioning, but also waste management. Picture 1 shows the dismantling of the upp?r loading part of our first dis- ^ .. ..^M^HPP^^^^^^^P solver. Only this part of the dissolvcr ^^k ^f^^^^^ÊÊÊ^M was dismantled. 0 ^^^k J^»*** ^^Êl1^^^^^^^Ê Picture 2 shows the dissolution tuix ^^^P ^4B ..^mJÉ^^^^^^^^M of our third dissolver for MTP fuel ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ with its recirculation leg. This dis- solver was completely dismantled. Lead sheets were placed at the bottom part to shield an area of high radiation. As found out later, this was due to activated stainless steel housings of thermocouples that had been forgotten to remove from the MTR fuel when 111

loading into the dissolver. Once this part of the dissolver had been cut away, dismantling of the rest did not pose any particular problems. Picture 3 is an underwater view of the removed piece of the dissolution leg with an activated stainless steel housing on the grid. The piece was transported in a shielded container and lowered into the pond to allow inspection.

Picture U gives a view on the cut away piece of the inner dissolution tube standing in the drip tray, whiist the outer heating mantle is being cut away. This picture is a demonstration of the efficiency of the decontamination in reprocessing plants: The radiation of the dissolver tube was decreased in such a way that direct access was possible during dismantling. Another typical example of the effi­ ciency of the decontamination in repro­ cessing plants is given in Picture 5: The cutting of the high-level waste transfer line, that connected the high- level liquid waste storage building with the plant. This line had to be cut to exclude any risk of re-contami­ nation of the cleaned plant cells via that line. To get an idea of the con­ tamination and radiation level, a hole was drilled into the shielding. A measuring probe was inserted and in­ dicated only negligible radiation. Af­ terwards, the shielding was removed, till the guiding tube, which was then cut, together with the transfer line, its spare lines and the ventilation line. The operator wars a dust mask, not as a protection against contamination, but against concrete dust.

Picture 6 shows the cut away piece. A wipe test taken from the inner surface of the transfer line measured 300 Bq. Picture 7 shows the cut transfer line with the guiding tube being close welded af­ ter complete removal of all lines that it wns originallv housing. 112

Picture 8 shows another example of the efficiency of decontamination. Here you see an operator in the still of our high-level waste evaporator, where all high-level wastes had been concentrated during active plant operation. To get an idea of the corrosion attack in the evaporator, the operator cut out an ejector tube penetrating from the vapour phase info the liquid phase in the still. This tube, the inlet part of which is seen on Picture 9 showed negligible residual surface contaminât ion and was carefully inspected and controlled for dimensional changes. After more than 37,000 hours of operation, no indications for corrosion could be detected, and as the dimensions or the tuhc

^fl^^^l^H^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Hi^^^^H the ^E^^JQH^^^A ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^K^^^H (>t ,ne evaporator, the tube 1 ^^^^^^^V ^^^K ^^K ^B J^BVHHEHHI remounted 113

Picture 10 gives a view on a scabbier used for the removal of contaminated con­ crete. This equipment was adapted to the particular work by combining it with a powerfull vacuum pump that sucks the removed concrete away, while the latter is collected m a waste drum. Picture 11 shows this waste drum, the filling status of which is controlled by a balance. Picture 12 shows another interesting application of such a powerful ventilator for the removal of boron silicate Raschig rings from process vessels in which they had been used as heterogeneous neutron poison. The picture shows the sucking up from a vessel via an extensible suction pipe. These works were carried out together with Transnuklear. Picture 13 gives a view into a tank with a rest of Raschig rings, where also a decontami­ nation head with spray nozzles, an air lift, dip tubes and a Raschig ring sampling tube are seen.

Picture lit shows the 125 I col­ lection cans with their various connections for the Raschig ring filling and the subsequent em­ bedding with cement milk. The cans were inserted into 200 1 drums or larger containers, which were also filled with concrete.

[_. «3fc# 114

Picture 15 shows a view into a lf> m high cell, where scaffolding and working platforms arc made for decontamination and dismantling operat ions. Structural materials were all wrapped into plastic sheets for protect ion from contaminât ion. Picture 16 shows the decontamination by means of spraying with a decontamination solution with a Karcher pump at 10 bar nozzle pressure. Picture 17 shows the decoii ruination with the high pressure water spray gun, operatwg at about .'JOO bar nozzle pressure. Picture 18 demonstrates the manual decontammation by brushing surfaces with decontammat ion solu­ tions. This technique was used mainly to remove residual spots of contaminât ion. 115

Picture 19 shows a part of the stainless steel lined head-end cell OJ. Fro::; in ini­ tial dose rate of more than 10.000 radih this cell has been decnntaminateri >>> .m ambiant radiation of some 10 nirad'h bv non-destrwt ive methods only. 77;- demnn- strates the usefulness of an appropriate cell lining. Picture 20 shows the dismounting of the shielded glove boxes of the highlv ,n'iv(- analytical box chain. Picture 21 shows these boxes waiting for internal decontamination in a spe

Picture 22 gives a view into the mechanical treatment pond showing different baskets with high-level solid wastes, that had to be segregated, repacked or conditioned. Picture 23 illustrates the se­ gregation operation. Waste pieces were fished up, meas­ ured and routed to the ap­ propriate line. Picture 2h shows the situation we (all "fishing for high- level waste pieces at the pond bottom". Due to dust and mist, nothing could be seen e Picture 2 ) shows the solid waste pond, alter its relillini'; with -r me ;•',(' y I indrn a I stainless steel baskets, containing / 4 ' <>i >'a;:dit lin>l and some ..' '• r.i ', o I hi .'/i-.'e. <•/ sol ni waste residues remaining tor rond 11 mn i ng. 117

I think wie may conclude from our experience that decommissioning of a direct main­ tenance reprocessing plant can be considered as a large scale maintenance opera­ tion that terminates the operational phase of that plant. Well developed and adopt­ ed maintenance techniques, together with experienced personnel from plant operation and a well defined and established waste management are essential preliminaries for the successful decommissioning. Thorough decontamination of the plant has to preceed this decommissioning phase. Eurochemic has demonstrated that all this can be safely achieved.

Coming back to our waste management activities, you all certainly recall that both our low-level liquid and solid waste management is characterized by careful segre­ gation into different streams and categories. Liquid wastes are pumped via an un­ derground pipe line, solid wastes are transported in drums to the waste treatment facilities of the SCK/CEN, where treatment and conditioning in view of sea dumping is carried out following NEA guide lines. Thus, Eurochemic was and continues to be in the lucky position of profiting from existing facilities and what is perhaps even more important, from a well established disposal option.

You certainly recall as well that the intermediate level liquid waste and the high- level liquid waste management comprise an interim liquid storage period, that gives sufficient time for the selection and realization of an appropriate conditioning pro­ cess. For the high-level wastes, the Pamela plant is presently in an advanced status of realization and the AVB plant is in its final project phase. Jacques van Geel is going to tell you more about these facilities later on.

The Eurobitum plant, which was developed at Eurochemic for the homogeneous incor­ poration into bitumen of our intermediate level jacket decladding wastes and the hot waste concentrate started active operation in the second part of 1978. More than 2,000 m3 of these waste streams were collected in our interim liquid storage tank farms. The bituminization process comprises an elaborate chemical pre-treatment of the waste solutions and the incorporation of the resulting slurry into blown bitumen in a screw extruder.

Up till now, more than 2,212 m3 of ILLW with more than 794,000 Ci fission products and 6,300 Ci alpha emitters were solidified in more than 26,500 hours of operation into 11,397 drums of 220 I made from stainless steel AISI 430. The bituminized waste contains 40 wt% salts and 60 wt% bitumen; its specific activity averages 420 mCi beta activity per litre and 3.4 mCi alpha activity per litre. Operational experience is very satisfying and the efficiency of the plant is high.

Let me now say a few words about the small fire incident of December 15, 1981. It was mainly the high confidence in the reliable operation of the plant that was misleading the operational crew in the last bituminization campaign of 1981, to mo- 118

dify the prescribed analytical control programme in view of saving some operation time. Due to this, the presence of thermally unstable organic residues in a fresh hot waste concentrate batch was not detected. As no countermeasures could be taken to eliminate the risk of exothermic decomposition reactions, inflammation of the con­ tents of three drums took place in the drum filling cell, one after another.

The provided fire fighting measures prooved to be very efficient in extinguishing the fires within a few minutes. As you all know, nobody was injured, there were neither undue irradiations of personnel, nor releases of activity, all mechanical equipment prooved to be operational after the incident, and after roughly 4 months of decontamination, preventive maintenance and additional improvements, a new re­ ception of the facility was made by the official Belgian radiation protection control body Corapro and routine operation restarted.

The Eurobitum plant is directly connected to the Eurostorage facility. A modular construction principle was chosen for this above ground bunker facility that has to guarantee fully retrievable storage of the waste drums during 50 years. It is supposed that a final repository will be available in Belgium at that time. Present­ ly, 11,397 drums are stored in the facility; two bunker cells are filled with 10,037 drums, the third cell contains 1,360 drums and the fourth drum is empty.

As you will conclude from the data presented, we are presently facing the termina­ tion of our bituminization campaigns. All eight tanks of the storage tank farm that were used for the interim liquid storage of our medium-level waste are practically emptied to their heel volumes. Rinsing and cleaning of the eight tanks is under preparation. For obvious reasons, the simultaneous bituminization of the resulting rinsing solutions will need extensive analytical controls and flowsheet adaptations. It is scheduled that these works will ask for another 6 to 9 months.

Contrary to the waste management of the liquid wastes, practically no treatment or storage provisions were made for the intermediate and high-level solid wastes. You certainly recall that due to the application of the chemical decladding these waste categories were not supposed to arise. When active operation showed that this was not the case, the solid waste pond was constructed for the underwater storage of the high-level solid wastes, of which some 25 m3 are still stored after repacking into cylindrical stainless steel canisters. The intermediate level solid wastes were collected for interim storage into different prefabricated shielded concrete and metal containers. Ten different types of containers with varying geometry and construction containing some 75 m3 of such wastes are presently stored.

They will be unpacked, segregated and conditioned in a shielded caisson, that has been designed and constructed by Eurochemic, making use, as much as possible, of existing equipment. Active operation will start in th<; second half of this year. 119

Though I 'm afraid that I have used up all my time, I would like to show a few more pictures to demonstrate the efforts made for the conditioning of our wastes. The first shows the waste cargo prepared by Eurochemic for the 1980 sea dumping operation; the second shows the completely filled second storage bunker, contain­ ing 5,013 drums with bituminized waste. Isn't it worthwhile to put these pictures into perspective with the Scveso wastes we've heard so much about recently ?

To wind up my presenta­ tion, I think we can all agree to the fact that Eurochemic has collected valuable experience, also in its post-operational phase, when decontamina­ tion, partial decommis­ sioning and practical waste management were the main activities. If the national and international interest in our work as expressed by the numerous inquiries for information and requests for technical visits could be taken as an evidence for the appli­ cation of our experience in future installations, we all at Eurochemic would undoubtedly be very satisfied. Up: Eurochemic's waste cargo for 1980 sea dumping. Down: Storage bunker 02, filled with 5,013 drums.

Personally speaking, I am very happy that I could participate in these most inter- esting works, and I would like to use this opportunity to express my sincere thanks to all my cooperators for their never ceasing enthusiasm, effort and skill that were the basis of the good results obtained up till now and that will be the guarantee of a successful continuation in the future.

More tin deeont amnuit ion and do< onuni^sion i rig works carried out at Eurochemic can be found in ETI'' :< .'.'97, ."W, id.' and ',<)',, and in Considerations on the Decontamina­ tion of a Reprocessing Plnnt, hv It. dild. In: decontamination of Operational Nu­ clear Power Plants, IAEA, Vanna, l')HI, p, ,s">-fAL', Pepnrt of a Technical Committee Meet in», tudd in V.d. Hrh;i •!::;. •!/•; // ' .' "7. I''7'K r 121

DEVELOPMENT WORK ON WASTE CONDITIONING

J. van Geel

It is for me an honour and a great pleasure to review the work in the Eurochemic Department for Industrial Development covering the last ten years. In view of the decision taken in 1971 by the Board of Directors to cease reprocessing activities, the R&D work during this period has been primarily devoted to solving Euro- chemic's problems in the field of high- and medium-level liquid wastes, the condi­ tioning of solid wastes and the treatment of organic solvent wastes.

During the period 1975-83, the development work at Eurochemic can be divided into:

1. Eurochemic's basic development programme, financed entirely by the Company's shareholders, and consisting of the following projects:

- Lotes; - Eurowatt; - Wet combustion; - Separation of mercury from HEWC; - Incorporation into a polymer-concrete matrix.

2. The HLW Technology Programme, financed by the German Ministry for Research and Technology and the German firm DWK. This programme is part of the Pamela HLW solidification project, of which an industrial scale demonstration facili­ ty is under construction at Eurochemic's site. It consists of the following projects:

- Vitromet production; - Product characterization.

Of the various centres of activities listed here, I nave selected three to discuss in some more detail: the Eurowatt process, the wet combustion process and the Pa­ mela project.

In all, some 30 people have been working to carry out Eurochemic's basic develop­ ment programme, while 10 staff members were assigned to the execution of the Pa­ mela High Active Waste Technology Programme. 122

The Eurowatt Process

Since 1972, Eurochemic has been carrying out a research and development program­ me on a process for the treatment of spent solvent originating from reprocessing facilities. In fact, during its active reprocessing period (1966-74), Eurochemic yielded a total of 61 m3 of spent solvent with varying TBP (tributyl phosphate) content and varying specific activity. This spent solvent contains degradation prod­ ucts, such as mono- and dibutyl phosphate, nitro-paraffins, aldehydes and organic nitrates. The degradation of the solvent results in fission product retention, pluto­ nium and uranium losses, precipitates, build-up of crud at the interface, and poor phase disengagement . Periodical cleaning of the solvent during reprocessing cannot maintain the required quality, consequently the solvent has to be discarded and treated as radioactive waste.

For the treatment of this type of waste, either incineration or incorporation into a solid organic material (bitumen, polyethylene, polyvinyl chloride and similar ma­ trices) have been applied or envisaged. However, both these treatment techniques suffer from several disadvantages. The incineration of TBP containing waste solu­ tions causes corrosion, pollution and off-gas purification problems, and moreover it generates relatively large volumes of secondary radioactive wastes in gaseous, liquid and solid form.

The incorporation into plastic materials is normally restricted to the TBP fraction of the spent solvent. The amount of TBP in the final solidified product is limited to about 10-40 wt%, causing a considerable increase of the volume of radioactive wastes to be handled and stored. Moreover, the solvent waste is not disposed of and remains an organic waste product with properties not entirely satisfactory for long-term storage.

The process developed at Eurochemic for the treatment and disposal of spent TBP- kerosene mixtures is judged to possess significant environmental, operational and economic advantages over the methods applied or proposed up to now. The various treatment steps and the installation used for this Eurochemic organic waste treat­ ment (abbreviated to Eurowatt) process are described hereafter.

The Eurowatt process comprises three main steps: (1) The quantitative extractive separation of the spent solvent mixture by means of anhydrous phosphoric acid into its pure kerosene (diluent) component and a heavier TBP-phosphoric acid phase containing all degradation products, ra­ dionuclides and other impurities. (2) The thermal decomposition of TBP in the absence of air (pyrolysis), catalyzed by the presence of phosphoric acid, into inactive volatile hydrocarbons 123

77?e l'iirowatt installâtic>n as it serrer/ to coiiiiition F.uro- chvmir 's spvnt solvent s.

and non-volatile inorganic phosphoric acids containing all radionucl i des originally present in the solvent waste. (3) The disposal of the inactive organic compounds from the pyrolysis step by burning or controlled release and the conditioning of the radioactive phosphoric acids for final storage by their conversion into a water-insoluble solid phosphate compound, glass or ceramic.

The first step is operated at room temperature in a classical mixer-set 11er type equipment, while the second step of the process is operated in a vertical wiped film reactor. This reactor consists essentially of a cylinder heated to 200° C which is continuously wetted by the TBP-phosphoric acid mixture. The residence time of this phase in the reactor, as well as its surface/ vol ume ratio is significantly increased by wiping the interior of the reactor with four wipers made of teflon and fi*od onto a central cylinder, turning inside the reactor.

For corrosion reasons, all metal parts which are in direct contact with the liquid are made of Hastel loy-B2. The gases leaving the pyrolyser consist of butène, some polybutenes and to a minor extent some phosphate esters. The condensable fraction is recovered in a condensor and the volatile fraction is filtered and finally dis­ posed >f after dilution with air.

From 1972 to 1978, tho Eurowatt process wa-> demonstrated in laboratory scale equip­ ment in a '.cries of runs lasting 2,'tfln limit • in all, v. i ' h IMIIII (old , mil active feed. 124

During this period, Hastelloy-B2 showed a high corrosion resistance and proved suitable as a construction material for the pyrolyser.

It was then decided to construct a pilot installation in the research building having a capacity of 600 I of solvent per 24 hours. This installation should demon­ strate the Eurowatt process and simultaneously treat 20 m3 of Eurochemic's spent solvent accumulated onsite. The installation was designed and constructed by the Company's own personnel. The first active run was started in 1981 and the 20 m3 of Eurochemic's spent solvent successfully treated.

The solvent contained between 4 and 30 vol.% of the extradant tributyl phosphate in n-dodecane as diluent and showed gross beta activities between 1.11 MBq/l and 1.48 MBq/l (30 u Ci/l and 40 u Ci/l ) and gross alpha activities between 0.56 MB:)/1 and 1.11 MBq/l (15 pCi/l and 30 M Ci/l ).

The phosphoric acid as secondary waste was used in the chemical p re-treat ment step of the bituminization plant for the insolubi I ization of strontium-90 by co-precipita­ tion with calcium phosphate. The operation of the demonstration facility has given full satisfaction.

In 1982, the French Cogéma contacted Eurochemic with a view to applying the Euro- watt process on the organic wastes of the reprocessing plant at La Hague. Labora­ tory tests were made on a sample of 2 I of this solvent. They showed that the Eurowatt process can be applied, without any difficulty, to the solvents of the La Hague plant. Négociations between Eurochemic and Cogéma are underway for the treatment of 100 m3 of spent solvent from La Hague in our Eurowatt installation. The adaptation of the installation and the operation costs will be financed by Cogé­ ma. And this, ladies and gentlemen, once again shows that R&D activities in the field of reprocessing can be paid off by third parties, if properly applied. The same can be said of our development work devoted to the Pamela process - which is discussed further. It was also financed by non-Eurochemic sources.

Wet Combustion

That development work can also be carried out in close cooperation with third parties was shown in the wet combustion project for the treatment of plutonium bearing combustible wastes. Here, three institutes worked together to develop a new method for the treatment of plutonium bearing solid waste originating mainly from glove box operation in reprocessing and fuel fabrication plants and laboratories. The two partners involved were GfK (Gesellschaft für Kernforschung, Karlsruhe) and the university of Darmstadt. 125

With the GfK, Eurochemic signed an agreement to jointly demonstrate the feasibility of the conditioning of combustible, plutonium bearing solid wastes by means of acid digestion (or wet combustion). In this, Eurochemic's interest was not purely scienti­ fic. About one ton of combustible plutonium bearing waste, containing approximately 7 kg of plutonium, was accumulated onsite. It could not be treated at the SCK/CEN and needed further treatment.

The Alona process, developed at Karlsruhe on the basis of the American acid diges­ tion process, was selected to be installed in the laboratories of the R&D building to demonstrate it at full scale and with real active waste. Simultaneously, about 800 kg of Eurochemic's plutonium bearing combustible solid waste would be treated. The tasks were distributed as follows: Eurochemic should develop, design and construct a feed pre-treatment unit in one of the laboratories of building 10, in which the solid waste was to be segregated in combustible and non-combustible waste and shredded into pieces of 0.5-1 cm length. The shredded waste, packed into 2 I plastic bags should then be monitored to estimate the plutonium content. The GfK should design, construct and install a facility for their Alona process in which the plutonium is converted into a plutonium sulphate containing solid residues. Eurochemic should recover the plutonium from the plutonium sulphate product and convert it into pure plutonium oxide (PuO-). The university of Darmstadt studied the dissolution of PuO„ in mix­ tures of HNO^ and H-SO, and developed a back-up process for the recovery of plu­ tonium from PuSO, containing residues.

The various process steps are outlined in the figure below.

Chemical Agent Acid Digestion Process Treatment Residues Stream Ï Undissolved Pu monitoring I H S0 , 0.1 M | - LEACHING 2 4 residues SW storage r Prim. JMT, 0.65 M _^ Aqueous Liquid waste EXTRACTION in octan,/keros. . raffinate storage

I HN03, 3 M j — RE-EXTRACTION

\ 1 1 PRECIPITATION Mother Liquid waste I H2C204, 1 M | - liquor storage J

Product CALCINATION Pu02 product storage 126

At the end of May 1980, the installation of the feed pre-treatment unit was finish­ ed and a total of 803 kg of combustible waste was segregated from 167 kg of non- combustible waste. Two methods were used to measure tne plutonium content of the non-segregated and segregated wastes. One was based on the passive neutron inter

:• • • • t 238 n 240^ rogatiotion and measures the spontaneous fission neutron emission from Pu, Pu 242 and """Pu. The second system was based on the passive gamma interrogation tech­ nique, which measures the intensities of the gamma lines emitted by the plutonium isotopes 238, 239, 240 and 241. The estimates obtaines from both assay systems com­ pared well and amounted to 7 ' 1 kg Pu.

Cold testing of the Alona installation and the plutonium recovery unit was started in November 1981. This period lasted about 4 months, in which a total of 430 kg of cold shredded waste was treated without major difficulties. The Alona installation became operational on February 20, 1983, and slowly but surely the capacity was increased. Until today, a total of 57 reactor runs are made, 19 of which were rinsings, i.e. runs in which no waste material is added to the reactor. 154 kg of solid waste were processed at an average processing rate of 4.1 kg per run. Ex­ tremes were < 0.5 and 6.9 kg waste per run. The total quantity of plutonium intro­ duced into the system amounted to 0.74 kg. Î

V'cw on t.hv plutonium rornvory unit. 127

Some of the first observations we made were the following: the varying composition of the solid waste seems to have a greater impact on the consistency of the slurry to be transported than was expected from the test runs with simulated waste batches; it turned out to be much more difficult to remove the plutonium sulphate from the ring reactor than was expected on the basis of the cold test runs using tantalum oxide as a stand-in material.

The Pamela Process

Eurochemic has been working in the field of solidification of high-level liquid wastes since 1964. In the early days, development work was devoted to mineraliza­ tion processes, such as the Lotes process and the Minerva process. The final prod­ uct was an aluminium phosphate with the same crystal structure as the mineral Berlinite in which the metallic waste ions were bound as phosphates. In the Lotes process aluminium phosphate granules of 0.5 cm in diameter were produced in a stirred fluid bed reactor heated at only 500° C. Due to pressure of time to solve Eurochemic's high-level waste problems, the project was discontinued and replaced by another solidification process of which it was believed that its development would require less time. This alternate process finally resulted in the development of the so-called Pamela project and was financed by the German Federal Ministry for Research and Technology and the German firm Gelsenberg, which was taken over by DWK.

According to the Pamela process, the high-level liquid waste is first vitrified to a borosilicate glass melt in a joule heated ceramic melter in which various process steps take place: evaporation of the continuously fed waste solutions containing more than 99% of the non-volatile fission products from the spent fuel; mixing of the waste solution with borosilicate glass frit; calcination of the resulting slurry to convert the metal nitrates into oxides; incorporation of fission product oxides into the molten glass at temperatures of * 1,150° C.

The ceramic melter is designed in such a way that the molten glass can be poored batchwise to fill steol canisters to form glass blocks, but also be discharged conti­ nuously to a beads production unit. It was the latter unit that Eurochemic had to develop, together with a unit for the incorporation of the glass beads into a lead matrix. Both units were developed in time at scale 1 : 1 yielding final product containers of 1 m height and 23 cm in diameter (the full scale diameter will be 31 cm).

The principle of the glass beads production unit is simple. The molten glass leav­ ing the ceramic melter via its overflow enters a cylindrical metal vessel of about 10 I contents, the bottom of which is provided with 15 nozzles through which the 128

viscous melt passes in the form of droplets. These droplets fall on a rotat ing disk, cool off to below their solidification temperature and are scraped off from the disk to be collected in the final product canister. When such a canister is filled with glass beads, it is transferred to a lead incorporation station. In this unit, the canister is heated to 450° C and lead granules are fed into it. The molten lead thus fills up the voids between the glass beads. After cooling down to 75° C, these canisters are covered and welded. Permeability tests showed that the final product (vitromet) is basically tight.

Sofar 22 t of glass beads, each weighing ± 0.6 g have been produced, and by the end of this year, a production of another 15 t is anticipated. The maximum production capaci­ ty sofar obtained is 25 kg/h.

By the end of 1983, the entire development pro­ gramme will be finished. With this project, Euro- chemic can look back upon a successful development programme carried out Glass droplets cooling on rotating disk. Up right the scraper is seen. within the anticipated time­ table and budget.

The same may be said of most of the programmes carried out in the R&D department during the past ten years. And that consti­ tutes a success which could not have been achieved without the full cooperation of all the staff members contributing to it.

1'iow nn vitronii-t ;>roi,'u(/. 129

HEALTH AND SAFETY ASPECTS OF REPROCESSING AT EUROCHEMIC

A. Osipenco

When I was told that I was to read a paper on the health and sa ety aspects of reprocessing at Eurochemic, I jumped into the archives and found that the related reports were a compilation of small incidents, while nothing was said of the smooth events. But it was obvious that the human factor was very important in these mat­ ters. So I started otherwise. In Belgium, the protection of the population and the workers against the hazards resulting from ionizing radiations is regulated by the Law of March 29, 1958 and by the Royal Decree of February 28, 1963.

1. Licensing of the Installations

One of the aspects of these regulations is the fact that they classify the nuclear installations into various classes according to the potential risks. And in Class I of nuclear installations we find nuclear reactors, installations where quantities of fissile material (natural uranium excluded) in excess of half the minimum criti­ cal mass are handled, or detained, and plants for the reprocessing of nuclear fuels, enriched or not.

So it was clear from the outset that we needed a licence. And taking over the story started yesterday by Mr. Rometsch, I can reassure you, because we finally got the licence for the operation of the plant. It was issued in 1968. In fact, at that mo­ ment we had two operating licences: one that was issued two years earlier (1966) for the research laboratories and the waste pipeline connecting Eurochemic with the waste treatment plant of the SCK/CEN, and this second licence for the operation of the fuel reception building and the reprocessing plant itself.

Later, we managed to have modifications and additions to our installations with the approval of the authorities, after discussions in what was called the Contact Commission with the Authorities (CCA). One of the two additional licences was for the construction and operation of the Pamela vitrification plant, the other for the adaptation and operation of the fuel reception and storage building, as it was foreseen at that time (1979-81) that it might be necessary to use the pools of Euro­ chemic for the storage of fuels coming from Belgian reactors. 130

The licence for the research laboratories and the waste pipeline was requested in December 1963 and granted by Royal Decree on January 28, 1966. The licence for the operation of the fuel reception building and the reprocessing plan? was requested in August 1965 and granted by Royal Decree on September 25, 1968. The additional licence for the construction and operation of the Pamela vitrification plant was requested in October 1978 and granted by Royal Decree on April 9, 1981. The licence for the adaptation of the fuel reception and storage building was re­ quested in February 1979 and granted by Royal Decree on April 16, 1981.

The existence of the Contact Commission with the Authorities is nothing official; this commission is not defined in the Royal Decree of 1963. The meetings are conducted on a goodwill basis, but they are very useful. They provide the opportunity to discuss, inform the authorities, get their advice on the installations we have built later, e.g. the bi tuminization facility and the storage bunkers for bituminized waste.

In this Contact Commission, we have representatives of the Ministry of Public Health, the Ministry of Labour, Euratom, The Netherlands (they asked to be repre­ sented because they are very close to our installations, and usually the meetings were attended by representatives of the Ministry of Public Health and of the ECN in Petten), representatives of the neighbouring 5CK/CEN (because of the waste prob­ lems), and of our recognized control body Corapro.

The Special Commission, which is an official commission, is chaired for two years by a representative of the Ministry of Public Health and two years by a represen­ tative of the Ministry of Labour. The Contact Commissions (different contact commis­ sions exist for the various Belgian nuclear installa'ions) are chaired in the inverse order.

2. External Radiation

(1) Rules

As to the radiation protection of the workers, the rules in Belgium are based on this Royal Decree of February 28, 1963, which is based in turn on the contemporary guide lines of Euratom, and they still impose that the accumulated whole-body dose may not overpass the formula 5(N-18) rem, with a second limitation of 3 rem per quarter and of course othor limitations for certain parts of the body. At present, these regulations are being revised to be put in accordance with ICRP 26 and the new Euratom directives of 1980. 131

How was the protection of our workers against external radiations organized in Eurochemic ? You will remember that for the normal operation we have accepted a weekly limit of 230 mrem, which is simply the 3 rem/quarter divided by 13 weeks. If work has to be performed in a high ambient exposure rate or at a weekly dose of more than 230 mrem, we have to fill in the Planned Radiation Exposure Permit (PREP), which is a document which materializes the discussions between the opera­ tion and safety responsibles and which determines the conditions in which these special operations can be performed. For intertenvions which are not specially in­ volving an external radiation risk, but which still involve some risk (radiation, contamination, industrial hazard, fire, etc.), we have to fill in a Hazardous Work Permit (HWP).

(2) Yearly numbers of PREP's and HWP's

I have recorded the yearly numbers of all these PREP's and HWP's, and I think the result is a sort of index jf the activities, as shown in figure 1.

Let us consider first the HWP's. During the operation, we had a yearly amount of about 1,500, which dropped quickly in 1975, when we stopped the reprocessing ope­ ration and had a period of rinsing and decontamination of the plant. Then we see again an increase in 1978 and 1979, during the dismantling operations which were carried out in a few cells and in the fuel reception and storage building. After these operations, the number decreased again, and during the last three years wo have some 700 HWP's per year. You see in 1980 the startup of the operations in the research laboratories, like Eurowatt and the shredding of the plutonium conta­ minated wastes in view of their wet combustion.

We have indicated on the top cf each column the increasing numbers of HWP's which are now approved for these operations in the research laboratories.

You see the same sort of evolution for the PREP's. The first line in each column represents the number of those PREP's which were prepared for a weekly dose ex­ ceeding 500 mrem. You see that during the operation, we had each year some of them. This was mainly due to the operations around the glove boxes of the pluto­ nium unit and also in the decontamination shop of building 2. The yearly amount of PREP's dropped in 1975 and increased again for the period of the dismantling operations in 1978 and 1979. In 1982, about ten PREP's were issued for entering the bituminizat ion facility and making a very short intervention in a radiation field of 20 R/h during the repair works after the fire which occurred there on December 15, 1981. 132

HWP

1500

HWP's

HWP's in Research lab.

1000

mam

500 -

i'v) '71 '75 '80

PREP's

> 230 mrem/week

| J > 500 mrem/week

Figure I: Yearly Numbers of HWP's and PREP's filled in during the period 1971-82 133

Figure 2 is a diagramme showing the evolution during the years 1969 to 1982 of the collective dose recorded for the personnel working on Eurochemic's site. The small part on the top of each column relates to people hired from other companies; the graph below the horizontal line represents the number of Eurochemic staff ex­ posed and at the bottom of each column the number of hired workers exposed.

Man - rem 400

\ \ h nr'K hemic ^ttirt

hired >uff

300 -

200

100

'69 '70 '72 •7ü '76 '77 '78 '79 '80 '82 •

100

200

WO

Figure 2: Yearly Collective Doses Recorded for Eurochemic's own personnel and hired staff (hatched part), 134

You can see that we never had an important contribution to the dose given to people from other firms during the operation period, neither during the dismantling operations in 1978 and 1979, when we had specialized teams from Germany to help us with the dismantling in some cells and in building 2. The main part of the col­ lective dose was recorded for Eurochemic's own personnel.

Figure 3 shows the highest individual doses that we have recorded each year. You see that in 1973 we have this high dose of about 10 rem. I must add that it is not in contradiction with the rules presently valid in Belgium, because the limita­ tion for the accumulated dose of 5(N-18) rem was never reached for any worker. I think that even at present the highest accumulated dose is less than 50% of the 5(N-18) value. This accumulation is only recorded for one person. Most of our ex­ posed personnel (77%) average an accumulation rate of no more than 1 rem/year.

As from the period 1975-76, we have implemented the limitation to 5 rem/year for the individual dose. During the year 1973, we had some more people having a dose between 5 rem and the maximum, but most of them only slightly exceeded the value of 5 rem.

Rem

10 r

_L _l_ -J- '69 '70 '75 '80 (y)

Figure 3: Highest Individual Yearly Doses (x) and Average Yearly Doses Recorded During the Period 1969-82 (broken line) 135

( 3) Main Sources of Doses During Operation

I think it is interesting to look for what sort of operations we had the highest contribution to the irradiation of the personnel. For the plant operators, the high­ est doses were received around the plutonium tail-end boxes, in the decontamination shop, in the pond water purification system, and also during the replacement of the vessel ventilation filters and sometimes during the replacement of the HEPA fil­ ters in the high-depressure exhaust (HDE) system.

For the maintenance workers, the mail causes for high doses were the repair of pumps and valves, the repair of sampling blisters, and the repair of the telemani- pulators in the dissolver cells. For the analysts, the hand doses are the most im­ portant, and for our safety personnel, it is during the monitoring of the situation in the cells during the decontamination works and in the preparation of active in­ terventions.

3. Internal Contamination

The detection of an internal contamination was based on the analysis of 24 h urine samples with a frequency according to the performed work, measured for alpha activity (plutonium), beta activity (strontium) and uranium (f luorimetry ). And if the result w?s higher than the investigation level, usually we first asked for more samples and if the result was confirmed, we had different possibilities: DTPA in­ halation for enhanced excretion, total body counting, lung counting (if applicable, wound counting) for additional measurement.

One of the most significant contamination incidents occurred in 1969 during work near a cell. It was not noticed that there was a loose connection, which due to an unbalance in the underpressures blew some air contaminated with plutonium. The investigation of this incident led to an enormous amount of analyses of urine samples, lung counting, etc., and finally it was established that six persons had a significant, or say a measurable intake which was however lower than the per­ missible amount. We continue to collect urine samples regularly from them, in order to calculate the yearly bone dose due to this incident.

4. Protection of the Environment

We will review rather quickly the protectin of the environment, as it was already mentioned by Bo Gustafsson this morning.

Gaseous releases to the Atmosphere. The limitations to the releases through our stack were calculated for the licence and they are based on a limit of 50 mrem/ 136

year for a person staying at the point of maximum concentration downstream of the stack. The limits which were put in our licence were the yearly releases for:

239 - alpha aerosols ( Pu) 1.25 Ci 90

- beta aerosols ( Sr) 220 Ci

- iodine-131 12.5 Ci

- krypton-85 6.1-106 Ci

And not in the licence, but calculated in the same way, we had a limit for:

- tritium 4.4-10 Ci

The measured releases of krypton-85 and tritium were:

Kr Tritium

1971 126,440 532 1972 199,600 706 1973 216,730 1,893 1974 100,232 1,579

The releases measured for alpha aerosols, beta aerosols and iodine-131 were far below the limits stated in the licence.

Liquid Releases to the SCK/CEN. Our liquid releases coming from the installations -3 —2 up to a level of 10 Ci alpha/m3 and 3.10 Ci beta, gamma/m3 activity are transferred to the SCK/CEN by three underground lines, respectively for conden­ sates, cold wasteo and warm wastes. Above these limits, the liquid wastes are con­ centrated and stored onsite.

5. More Important Nuclear Incidents

My colleagues have been able to speak mainly of the achievements and successes of Eurochemic, but I have been asked to say a few words of some incidents that we had during the operation. And I think it is useful too, because one can always learn from these incidents.

We had three significant incidents during operation. The first occurred on May 1, 1972, and was a leak of the pipeline through which warm waste was transferred to the SCK/CEN. I recall that at that moment this transfer line was double walled: 2 concentric tubes in ordinary steel protected with bitumen. The leak was the result of a corrosion which was not detected by the system that was foreseen. The leak occurred near the small beach near the road from Eurochemic to the SCK/CEN. It was seen by one of our staff members coming to work. The corrective actions were 137

taken at once: we had to break up the concrete of the road and to dig out the sand nearby and to remove both, as usual, in 600 steel drums. Some of the contam­ inated water streamed into the small canal, where the SCK/CEIM has permanent sampling points, so that we had the results of the contamination of the water al­ most at once. The highest value measured a few hours after the incident was 1,000 pCi/l beta and 30 pCi/l alpha. This value dropped to double the background value after two days jnd to normal background value after one week. Anyway, 'his small canal is connected with the big canal near Eurochemic, and there is an enormous dilution, so that there was no risk for anybody.

The conservative estimation was that half a curie had been released, mainly to the sand and the road. Some measurements of sand samples taken at the bottom of the small canal showed that about one tenth of a millicurie had been fixed in that mud. This was monitored during a few months after the incident by the SCK/CEN and it showed that there were no measurable further consequences of the release.

The fire incident of December 15, 1981 in the bi tuminizat ion facility was already mentioned by Werner Hi Id. I will remind only the radiological consequences, which were actually very low. The stack release was less than 100 y C i of beta, gamma activity. During the incident itself, the absorbed dose of the personnel was maxi­ mum 60 mrem for two persons and much lower for the other staff involved. During the repair works, the collective dose we recorded was 13 man-rem during a period of 15 weeks and evenly distributed among about 50 persons.

The third incident was in fact the first one. It occurred in December 1971: a leak of uranyl nitrate from a tank at the north-east corner of building 10. It was distri­ buted into the ground due to the fact that it was very close to the rainwater dis­ persion trenches. The action taken was to collect the sand into some 550 drums, which were sent to a chemical plant for the recuperation of the uranium.

6. Industrial Safety

I think that our statistics for industrial safety compare very favourably with other safe industries. We had in fact a certain number of fires which developed in non- nuclear areas, one of them in our previous administration building, in the confer­ ence room, occupied at that moment by the editing office of the SCK/CF.N, in 1972. One of the barracks of the construction site of building 26 completely burned in 1975. And we had a few outbreaks of fire during repair works on the roofi

But seeing how late it is, I think I will Like c,\rv of my own safety rind try to avoid to transform the hungry audience into .in anqry audiente. Third Session PANEL ON THE APPLICATION OF EUROCHEMIC EXPERIENCE

Cha irman

Franz Marcus Working at Eurochemic from 1959 till 1969 as head of the Transport, Storage & Waste Division. Presently officer of the Nordic Liaison Committee for Atomic Energy.

Speaeakerk s

Reinhard KroebeI Working at Eurochemic from 1965 till 1970 as head of the Applied Chemistry Section. Presently head of PWA (Projekt Wiederaufarbeitung und Abfa I Ibehandlung), Karlsruhe.

Michel Lung Working at SGN on the Eurochemic project from 1958 till 1963. Working for Eurochemic from 1963 till 1966 as construction sub- manager. Presently director of International Relations at SGN.

Si Iv i o Cao Working at Eurochemic from 1963 till 1970 as head of the Chemical Process Division. Presently working in the Fuel Cycle Department of ENEA.

Walter Schii I 1er Working at Eurochemic from 1958 till 1965 as head of the Nuclear Services Division. Presently managing director of WAK.

Johannes Asyee Working at Eurochemic from 1962 till 1971 as special assistant to the general manager. Presently commercial director of Urenco (UK).

Horst Keese Working at Eurochemic from 1963 till 1969 as head of the Shift Laboratory Section of the Analytical Laboratory Division. Presently managing director of Transnuklear.

Jér gen Klitgaard Working at Eurochemic from I960 till 1966 as startup engineer and head-end shift supervisor. Presently head of the Chemistry and Chemical Engineering Department of Skaerbaekvaerket .

Werner Hunzinger Working at Eurochemic from 1962 till 1970 as head of the Health and Safety Division. Presently chief expert at Motor Columbus Consulting Engineers.

Hans Ziind Working at Eurochemic from 1964 till 1967 as criticality engineer. Presently vice-president of the Nuclear Power and Thermal Energy Division at Motor Columbus Consulting Engineers.

Paul Dejonghe Member of Eurochemic's Technical Committee; associate general manager of the Belgian Nuclear Research Centre (SCK/CEN). '39

INTRODUCTION

Franz Marcus

Everybody who has been involved in work at Eurochemic has carried along . :th him his personal experience. Many of us have used the knowledge in technical fields closely related to reprocessing and the back end of the fuel cycle. In t hit- way the experience has been transferred to industry, to authorities and to bodies responsible for nuclear safety. Many have been able to use their experience m their further professional career.

When we discussed in the organizing committee how to put together this panel on the application of the Eurochemic experience, we decided to select various partici­ pants who have used their acquired knowledge in a number of different ways. All of these persons accepted to participate here today, so I can now introduce (his panel, which looks to me to be a typical selection of what could be called "the Eurochemic Gang".

As a matter of fact, many former employees from Eurochemic have played an impor­ tant role in the European nuclear world during the past twenty years. It is almost unheard of going to an international meeting where nuclear fuel cycle questions are dealt with, without falling across some old Eurochemic member. It is difficult to express in clear terms this particular mechanism which - based on personal re­ lations - links together members of what I call the "Eurochemic Gang" and which has been of significant importance in carrying forward uniform views, and creating relations between countries.

One reason for selecting me as a chairman for this session was that I took upon me to try to keep our very tight time schedule. Please, now, relate your experien­ ce. Your contributions will be sufficient to introduce yourselves, so I don't need to present each of you separately. I UI

FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS FOR FUEL REPROCESSING

AND RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT

R. Kroebel

In 1973, the Kernforschungszentrum Karlsruhe (KfK) demanded from the shareholders of KEWA (Kernbrennstoff Wiederauf arbeitungsgesei Ischaf t ) to know the main objectives of reprocessing research end development for the large German reprocessing plant, planned to operate in the mid-eighties in Western Germany. I was chosen to help the KfK in establishing its first coordinated R&D programme, starting in 1974. KfK had already started activities in this field since about 1960, but no goal had been set so far.

Industry groups and KfK groups merged their knowhow and cooperated within the United Reprocessors Group (URG) as well with the French CEA and the British BFNL to establish a sound basis for an industrially operable flowsheet. This task was fulfilled by mid-1974 and KfK could derive from this flowsheet which areas of know- how needed further development efforts.

In 1974, the coordinated KfK programme started as a so-called R&D project for reprocessing and waste management. Due to the fact that each country, especially in Western Europe, has its own regulations for waste release and disposal, many tasks of the programme are typical for the respective country. This is strongly so for gaseous releases into the environment. In the case of Western Germany, liquid and solid wastes can be collected, immobilized and disposed of in deep geologic formations like salt mines or clay covered dry iron ore deposits, Asse and Konrad being the present examples.

The interdependence of new technologies in the reprocessing (e.g. tritium removal, 85 electrochemical treatment), off-gas (e.g. iodine traps, ' Kr traps) and the waste field (e.g. vitrification technology in ceramic melters for highly active wastes, ce­ mentation and bituminization, in-situ solidification in underground caverns for low- and medium-level wastes) is the driving force for our research, development and demonstration.

In the first ten years of the project, KfK has spent about 550 million DM and 2,100 menyears of R & D personnel was busy within the programme. Industry has estab­ lished its own demonstration programme with 1 : 1 mockups. 142

The general objective of our project is the improvement of existing and development and testing of new» processes, equipment and products, with a view to increasing the economy and the safety and decreasing the environmental impact. A triangle of these general objectives is given in the figure below.

ECONOMY

INCREASE OF EQUIPMENT AND PROCESS zRELIABILIT Y REMOTE HANDLING MINIMIZATION OF THE Pu- TECHNluut LOSSES AND HASTE AMOUNTS PROCESzS CONTROL IMPROVEMENT OF THE SAFETY OF EOUIPMENT AND PROCESSES

OPTIMIZATION OF WASTE FORMS

ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY COMPATIBILITY

* THE TRIANGLE OF ECONOMY-SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMPATIBILITY

These objectives are broken down into five main topics: 1. Head-end and off-gas; 2. Extraction; 3. Waste treatment; i*. Intervention and handling techniques; 5. Process control each of which is exemplified by the following special objectives.

1. Objective for Head-end and Off-gas Treatment

- Optimization of the dissolution conditions for LWR and MOX fuel - Characterization of the fuel dissolution residues. U3

- Development and testing of a dissolver off-gas system. - Development of methods for the immobilization of krypton.

The results obtained were the following: - The solubility of several plutonium fuels has been determined; development of a process for almost complete removal of iodine during the fuel dissolution step. - The chemical composition of dissolution residues was analyzed. - For the dissolver off-gas a cleaning system was developed and tested (testing facilities Passat, Reduktion, Kreta); the results were used in the conceptual design of Azur. - The krypton immobilization processes, zeolite encapsulation and ion implantation were investigated and the waste form properties determined.

Furthermore, we continue our R & D by current and planned activities: - Optimization of dissolution conditions for FBR fuel. - Study of the formation of solids in feed solutions after clarification. - Operation of the dissolver off-gas treatment facilities. - Investigation into krypton retention by fluorocarbon absorption.

2. Objective for Extraction

- Elaboration of chemical flowsheets for reprocessing of LWR and FBR fuels. - Minimization of plutonium losses and quantities of waste. - Improvement of safety and reliability of equipment and processes. - Test of processes for tritium retention.

Here the results can be summed up likewise: - Improvement of the chemical flowsheets by experimental (Milli, Labex) and theore­ tical (simulation analysis) investigations; reprocessing of FBR fuel in Milli. - Development of electrochemical processes and equipment for plutonium reduction and oxidation, for denitration and for hydrazine oxidation, successful testing in WAK of an electro-reduction mixer-settler and electro-oxidation cell. - Application of hafnium as a neutron absorber for large pulsed columns; modelling of disturbances in the Purex process. - Determination of the characteristics and specifications of equipment and process for optimal tritium retention in the first cycle.

Current and planned activities in the field of extraction will be: - Determination of favourable flowsheets for shortly cooled FBR fuel. - Further development of the electrochemical and salt free processes for improvement and simplification of the process as well as the minimization of the waste. - Theoretical and experimental studies on the kinetics of mass transfer in extrac­ tion equipment. 144

- Development and testing of fast contactors. - Investigations of the influence of disturbances in the Purex process.

3. Objective for Intervention and Handling Techniques

- Development and testing of remote handling systems and components. - Investigation of material properties; determination of the best suited construction material.

We obtained the following results during the last ten years: - Development of the remote handling systems for Pamela. - Definition of time schedules for remote maintenance. - Corrosion studies on construction materials for dissolvers. - Investigation of hafnium as a material for critically safe equipment.

Our current and planned activities in the field will be further R 6 0 on: - Testing of remote handling concepts and components for the WA 350 reprocessing plant (throughput of 350 t/y). - Corrosion tests on materials for components.

A. Objective for Process Control and Process Data Processing

- Development of in-line instruments and automated analytical laboratory systems to increase the availability and operation reliability of processes. - Design of computer based process information systems.

Results which we obtained are listed below: - Tests of in-line instruments for the continuous determination of fissile materials in fuel elements by active and passive neutron counting, in waste packages (waste drum monitor), and in cladding hulls and dissolution residues. - Criticality control on pulsed columns (hafnium monitor). - Method of measurement of uranium, plutonium and HN03 concentrations, - Test of a computer based process data acquisition system.

Presently, we are busy with current and planned activities in the field of: - Adaptation of the LWR in-line instruments to higher plutonium concentrations. - Acquisition of all process data relevant to a reprocessing and waste treatment plant.

5. Objective for Waste Treatment

- Development and testing of solidification processes for high-level waste. - Development of processes for the solidification of fuel dissolution residues. 145

- Development of processes for the treatment of alpha waste. - Determination and optimization of the behaviour of waste forms.

Our results read as follows: - Vitrification process developed and tested; a suitable active facility (Pamela) is under construction in Mol. - For conditioning of dissolution residues, a procer 5 for embedding in a ceramic matrix was conceived. - Development of a process for the acid digestion of alpha waste; construction of a suitable facility (Alona) in Mol. - Determination of the repository relevant properties as well as characterization of glass, bitumen and cement waste forms.

The remaining current and planned activities in this field are: - Construction of the Pamela facility, evaluation of the operation experience. - Further development of a process for the embedding of dissolution residues in ceramic. - Hot test of the acid digestion in the Alona facility; evaluation of the operation experience. - Long term tests on the behaviour of cement waste forms under repository condi­ tions, determination of the quality of HLW glass forms produced in a technical scale facility.

This short overview gives only some headlines, but it shows distinctly that, though we are capable of planning and constructing reprocessing plants in conformity with set safety standards, there is room enough for further increase of availability from 200 days/year to say 300, to make better waste products in a cheaper way, or to make less waste at all.

Process control can now make use of data processing equipment which was not available for existing plants. Accountability should be possible with less costly methods, and it should be more up to date than is possible today. New monitoring equipment, remote techniques, better materials of construction and a better under­ standing of the behaviour of minor components like technetium or neptunium should make reprocessing more reliable and predictable.

My credo is that any technology needs the help of R & D until it is no longer pur­ sued as a technology. That means, that there is no stop of R & D when a special plant project is frozen for construction. Only if a given technology is no longer applied, R&D for this technology may be stopped as well. It was Eurochemic that has given the necessary background for my further career, and the invaluable friendship of so many former colleagues all over the world helped me a lot in achieving my goals. INFLUENCE OF EUROCHEMIC EXPERIENCE ON THE JAPANESE AND FRENCH REPROCESSING PLANTS

M. Lung

If we try to classify the existing reprocessing plants, and if we put the American defence Canyon plants in a separate category altogether, we could say that the Eurochemic plant is a second generation direct maintenance plant, the first genera­ tion being Windscale 1 or UP1 in Marcoule (see figures 1 and 2). In the same se cond generation we can put such plants as NFS, Windscale 2 anu UP2 at La Hague. SAP at Marcoule is a special case.

The third generation could be to some extent represented by plants like WAK, Tok ai Mura, HAO, Barnwell. ATI, Saluggia could be put in a special category, as well as Trombay . And now we are entering a new generation of plants, like UP3, VA 350, Thorp and the second Japanese plant, the TOR FBR plant at Marcoule being also in a special category.

Figure I REPROCESSING PLANTS

DEFENCE (Canyon type) Han ford, SRr

1st GENERATION Windscale 1, UN, (SAP), Idaho

2nd GENERATION Euroc-hemic, NFS, Windscale 2, WV'l

3rd GENERATION Tokai-Mura, WAK, Pdrnwe I I, HAO (?a I ugg i a, AT 1 I

4th GENERATION IIP.}, WA .ISO, .INF:? plant, THORP

Figure 2 LWR REPROCES sir 40 1 I Start End Active Stop Nominal Proc< s<-.cd t innatjt' COUNTRY PLANT design constr. startup capac i ty

1 1 USA Nrs - West Valley 1959 1965 1966 1972 300 t/y 600 t 1250 I LWR)

USA MFRP - Morris 1964 1971 (1971) 300 t'y

USA BMFP - Barnwell 1967 1974 (1974) 1,500 i/y

Bplçjium Eurochrmic - Mol 1959 1965 1966 1974 200-300 kg/d 90 I

,V,.c[_Cf rrtidny WAK - Karlsruhe 1964 1970 1971 35 t/y 120 (60 l l We. 1

| Un. Kir g dom Windscale oxide head-end B 20'. 1958 1968 1969 197 J 1 t/d 120 i Aor< • 1 WH

; ) r tiH( .• UP2 HAO 1967 1975 19/6 400 !•y v' '

! l.lD.in l'ik.li M.ir-,1 196") 1974 1''7 ,' /'OP I , • -r, 148

I shall briefly comment some features of the Eurochemic plant which have been transmitted to the plants of the third and fourth generation in France and in Japan (see figures 3 and 4). My remarks will concern such items as process, operation philosophy, waste management, equipment and overall features.

1 . Main Process

As you know, Eurochemic had quite unique features, among them chemical declad- ding, treatment of almost any kind of fuel, from gas graphite to highly enriched uranium. It has been a bold precursor in many aspects (see figure 5).

Figure 5 MAIN CHARACTERISTICS OF THE REPROCESSING PLANTS

(SjGM:I^M

ruis ie • Wfl«t «IOCS «•MCIMM «rncir» caMCliT »t**t i» •Jin n i«pt or fumwti KW tmm ran m

u», icoum) •>i«ir v mi. • altrat* «CR. «Mil WOI. «Ml. CM - OMMlllt ion t MU omet njwi.iu AI.IU.IM,

U Ml > iMl.« 0 Minn «CM. «Mil H. ». KICK. OKM/III*. vr, icoomi I • * 1 fUU :M*I MM.Y no t 1«T» • tu ' *» ) : for UN * t Pu •CO). CttJ»/ (lll.l*u V altrat* 4000 t sa noi. oo» ' imMi i » » urn. > m t %«i .iu.i*<. U «trata I»J «oumi «oo t man. VOt MCCH. CM* i • » run. •UK* l(*VIU./*u »i, ICI.».i H»7/T» »Ol •toi. Oil I o * run. : o.{ t •UKl ft».IP», uaitrtto r o • run. \ » i man. i CU/W* HOI. an on.a •wr» iu7*i.«.*» «TO U Ml. u Mtrat* ISO tu V» CMM. OtOJV. H i » no. omci 0,7 tftj m» IUAI.IU ,t*u' i i • * run. *°I una am

UHUltoi l»TI IM «I UMK If CM. 019I/CV« i » • nn 0.1 Wi . » A.l. mmu ttru.wlir.. ir mm.miLm: •IWK4K l i U mi. mncToncct IM» •Mr* iwv.M.irt. an T nv* : L * «

io» na ' i*» or» •MM WW m * «• r

i • • m • MO UW7 • »» » ; to* it»»

Silicagel treatment

Pu Anion exchange treatment

(Up right) Figure 3: Cogéma's La H a guv Site. Picture taken in 1980.

(Down right) Figure h: Tnkni-Mura Peproressmg Centre of PNC. Started in 1()77 149

ï£*-;

'HW«Ö:-, 150

The idea of partitioning after a first co-decontamination cycle has been fol­ lowed for the TOR and UP3 plants. The rather sophisticated basic/acid solvent regeneration systems have also been adopted in all subsequent plants. 4+ Also U reduction for plutonium separation (before, it was done by ferrous sulphamate) . While one can regret that the Eurochemic plant did not adopt high-level wa ie concentration with nitric acid decomposition by formaldehyde, like in the UP2, UP3, TOR and Tokai plants, important experience was gained on concentration under vacuum. This could have had beneficial results on the acid recovery system of some of the later plants, where it was not used for economy reasons on investment. Of course, vitrification of high-level waste was still in the limbs at the t •' no of Eurochemic. It will be standard for UP3 and TOR, as it is already for UP1 (see figures 6 and 7). The fuel reception, handling and storage principles at Eurochemic have been maintained with notable improvements at Tokai and especially at UP3 (see figures 8 and 9), where such items as dry cask unloading and in-pond water regeneration will be used (see figure 10).

Figurp ft: ('otrrmn 's l'ilrilient ion I'lant of Murrciulv iAVMi, sf

Figure 7: AIM Yitr-ifiatt ion. I ntcrmed iatr

r st(ir,i: }r of /;/,iss r,mi

Figure 8 iup left': XPH Cask Unloading and Docon'amin.it i< Hague, 1W1.

Figure 9 (up ripjtt XPH Cask ('nlnudirif fond, Lit Hague, 1981.

Figure JO (rigjit : C Pond fur I'P'L La ll.ir.tie. 152

2. Operation and Maintenance Philosophy and Influence on the Lav 'ut

The Eurochemic plant is basically a remote operation d i - ec: • maintenance pi mt. This is due, for a large part, to the fact that there is verv little mechanical equipment in this plant, where all the processes are chemical. Little equipment has been put in recesses or blisters for easier maintenance. But the separation into a reasonable number of cells and zones has proved beneficial (see figure 11). In fact, the very simple and straightforward design of the civil work at üurochemi c is and remait.- an example which has been followed in the newer plants, but not always with such excellency (see figure 12). Later experience shows that too many recesses, wall thickness variations, inclines complicate the building construction and the construc­ tion time schedule, especially with a seismic-proof design.

In the Tokai plant 'figure 13), the idea of the central intervention zone, very practical indeed, has been maintained. So is the idea of an elevated transmitter room behind the control panels, maintained at Tokai. In the UP3 plant, the inter­ vention zone is surrounding the cells instead of median. But the newer plants use remote maintenance more extensively, with so-called mechanical cells for remote re­ placement or repair of moving equipment for usable pieces.

In the Tokai plant, fragile hot chemical equipment such as valves, jets, pumps, is isolated in recesses. This is the case in UP3, but moreover replacer, int has been provided remotely and under alpha containment, using specially disconnectable equipment and appropriate shielded containers called EMEM (enceintes mobiles étan- ches de manutention). In the case of TOR at Marcoule (figure 14), remote operation and remote maintenan­ ce have been achieved for a 100 percent in the head-end facility, using handling crane and power manipulator and MS manipulator whenever necessary. The chemical part is installed in the former SAP plant in equipment modules which can be decom­ missioned by remote means.

In the newer plants we no more allow the cell walls to be in direct contact with the environment. The seismic probUms have been taken into account to a large ex­ tent and sometimes to full extent as in Tokai-Mura and UP3.

3. Waste Management

In this respect Eurochemic has also been a precursor, because the inland location of such a plant has obliged to foresee a rather elaborate was'e treatment system to reduce the released wastes to a minimum, especially in view of the high specific activities handled. This means that medium-level waste concentration by evaporation has also been adopted for Tokai-Mura, where rejection limits are very stringent. Waste concentrates tit e subsequently embedded in hi lumen, as at Lurt/ hemic . 153

c BUILDWGS 1&2 • pntBs t M raptm & stap •« • IlfVATKM (fCTWN C ° '

Figure 11

3 h

BUUMCS 1S2 pracnt & M fiesta» t ftonfi PLANtlCTION O O f torn l*«l in.rnm ó^ •^ï

Figure 12 ISA

Figure 13: BIRD VIEW OF TOKAI-MURA REPROCESSING PLANT

1. Truck airlock 2. Cask decontamination room 3. Fuel unloading pool 4. Fuel storage pool 5. Mechanical treatment cell 6. Dissolver loading cell 7. Feed adjustment cell 8. Separation ceils 9. U purification cell 10. Pu purification cell 11. Ut i lity room 12. Control room

Plant capacity: 0.7 t U/d. Spent fuel to be processed: enriched U fuel. Cladding material: Zircaloy or stainless steel. Burn-up: 23,000 MWd/t (average). Specific power: 36 MWd/t (average). Cooling time: 180 days (min.). Enrichment: 4% (max.). Type of process: Purex process with chop and leach, Product: uranium trioxide (U03). plutonium nitrate [Pu(N03)4].

FBR FUELS Figure 14: TOR PROJECT (WW) ;TOR Traitement d'oxydes rapides; FBR oxide fuel reprocessing)

i TO UP. 1 FUEL RECEIPT JPw NITRATE)

JVtl STORAGE PwO, STORAGE MECHANICAL t TREATMENT PRESENT FACILITY (SAP) I—I DISSOLUTION r — —-1 |0ENITRATI0N | '=il M CLARIFICATION *- II il Z MATERIAL »« CYCLE U*Pw EXTRACTION •Wnd P« CYCLE»-* 3rd Pw CYCLE O BALANCE AN0 PARTITION | 4 II m I - e OFF- CAS T TREATMENT It !i F P nd !#>• 2 U CYCLE i-» CYCLE • P- S0LI0 WASTE CONCENTRATION k._. — . Jk J > TREATMENT L SOL 10 WASTE STORAGE I Tl I CXPANSCN I U NITRATE I GLASS * STORAGE | POSSIBILITY | AVM ? I MOCKS I OCKCTCOlOiftlCMCO • STORAGE ! I TOR I %m m mmm m J TOR Now hoad-tnd (now building) Prosont SAP and ro-usod portions Modifications to orosont SAP 155

The solvent waste has likewise been treated, using a German process, very similar to the Eurowatt process developed at Mol.

Gaseous effluents from dissolution or from vessel off-gases have !">een thoroughly captured and cleansed in separate off-gas systems provided with iodine, acid and particulate abatement. The iodine removal system is now being perfected for the new plants using more efficient scrubbing and absorption systems.

A. Equipment Considerations

The Tokai dissolvers (see figure 15) are a rather direct outcrop of the Eurochemic tube and slab batch dissolvers. The two installed out of the. three originally fore­ seen have suffered corrosion leaks which have caused the plant to stop in Febru­ ary. These dissolvers have been remotely repaired by PNC and are scheduled to be used in November 1983, which is a first in such remote maintenance and repair work.

Radically different routes are being followed for UP3 and TOR, where continuous dissolvers will be used, a rotary wheel dissolver for UP3 and a hollow hélicoïdal dissolver for TOR.

The centrifugation step of Eurochemic, for the clarification, has been used at HAO and UP3, while pulsed filtration is used for Tokai. At TOR, both systems can be used and compared.

The excellent performances of the pulsed columns at Eurochemic and at the SAP in France have prompted us to use them in the new UP3 and TOR plants. For cri- ticality reasons the UP3 columns will be annular, due to their size.

In the plutonium tail-end, the use of annular tanks and slab tanks (see fig. IS) has been generalized. The plutonium oxalate rotary filter has been improved

Figure 15: Drawing of Tokai-Mura dissolver I right). 156

into a vertical version in use in the new UP2 MAPU plant and in the UP3 plant. !.. 1 The titanium mother liquor evaporator ^. **v has given way to a zirconium evaporator at UP2, because of corrosion problems.

For the bi tuminizat ion of the radwastes, an improved, nuclearized version of the extruder will be used at UP3.

The airlift pumps and jets for moving liquids continue to be used in the newer plants, but the important ones can be remotely serviced. Remotely maintained pumps have also been installed for high­ ly active liquids at Tokai and general­ ized in the newer plants (see figure 17, PAAC pump).

Figure 16: A plutonium slab tank.

Likewise, the Oak Ridge Thorex sampling system, well appreciated at turochemic, has been used extensively. The new sampling benches however have been automat­ ized and programmed (see figure 18, Picador bench).

Data logging, started at Eurochemic, is be­ ing generalized for UP3, where near real time accountability will be possible.

F'ifrurr 17: PAAC, ,i self-primitif, rrmotcly m,i int ,i inerf niimn, lr>7

lrif[urv IS:

i'ii\irli,r - .'.'O in'.nl

.1 iitunia11<- sa/,\:.n/;n;;

hcnch. Insitlv ncv. i>; f/ie siunplm.",' re// a' /.,-i lLi'\uc

5. Overall Experience

Most of the problems which have been encountered and solved more or less success­ fully at Eu roc hemic have helped for the design of the newer plants on an interna­ tional basis. Among these, I wish to sire,-, the later experience which is the decon­ tamination of the plant and successful demonstration of techniques which are being generalized today, for example, in the case of the Tokai acid recovery evaporator.

6. Conclusion

Between the small, compact, simple reprocessing filant of 1966 (see figure 19) and the large industrial complex of UP3 twenty years later (see figure 20), there are many differences, but many concepts or item-, can be traced back to Eurochemic. It is hoped that the international spirit v-hich made this plant a success in its time will permit this project to take a new lift . '5S

Figure 19: F a roe hemic Pvpmcessirig Plant. Started 1966.

Figure 20: Potent View on UP3 Complex, La Hague. 159

L'APPLICATION DE L'EXPERIENCE EUROCHEMIC A L'ENEA

S. Cao

Les activités sur le retraitement des combustibles irradiés ont commencé en Italie en 1959, après la décision du gouvernement italien de participer au groupe d'étude de I'OECD concernant une usine européenne de retraitement. Dans ce cadre, deux lignes d'activité parallèles et complémentaires ont été établies. D'une part, un groupe de jeunes universitaires, ingénieurs et techniciens auprès do l'université de Rome, et ensuite dans le nouveau centre de recherche de Casaccia a commencé à travailler dans le domaine de la chimie des actinides, du procédé de l'extraction par solvant et sur le développement des équipements critiques des usines de retrai­ tement. D'autre part, plusieurs ingénieurs et techniciens italiens ont été envoyés auprès de la nouvelle société Eurochemic pour participer aux activités de recherche et de développement et aux travaux de projet, construction, démarrage et exploita­ tion de l'usine de Mol.

Dans les années soixante, deux autres décisions ont été prises en Italie afin do compléter et donc d'assurer au pays toutes les connaissances du procédé, de la technologie et de l'exploitation dans le domaine du back-end. La première décision a été de réaliser à Rotondella, au sud de l'Italie, près de l'ancienne Eraclea de la Magna Grecia, une usine pilote, nommée ITREC, pour la démonstration du cycle uranium-thorium à travers le retraitement et la refabrication à distance du combus­ tible du réacteur à eau légère de Elk River (Etats-Unis). La deuxième décision a été de réaliser une usine pilote, nommée EUREX, au nord de l'Italie, près de Turin pour le retraitement des combustibles MTR, plus tard modifiée pour le retraitement des combustibles à oxides.

Ce complexe d'activités sur le back-end peut seulement s" justifier par le climat d'optimisme et d'enthousiasme pour le nucléaire qui régnait en Italie dans les an­ nées soixante, et il devait constituer le "background" pour le retraitement indus­ triel dans notre pays, soit pour le cycle uranium-plutonium, soit pour le cycle uranium-thorium et uranium enrichi.

Il peut être utile de rappel 1er que les deux usines pilotes, ITREC et EUREX, ont été basées sur deux concepts différents d'installation et d'entretien. La première, ITREC, se base sur un concept modulaire où les équipements actifs sont installés dans une seule grande cellule sur modules mobiles et romp I ncables. I 'entretien se 160

f- 't dans une cellule spécialement équipée, après déplacement du module intéressé. La deuxième, EUREX, comme Eurochemic, se base sur l'entretien directe, après dé­ contamination, des équipements installés dans plusieurs cellules blindées.

Les différences technologiques significatives entre EUREX et ITREC d'une part et Eurochemic d'autre part, bien sûr à part la capacité, sont constituées entre autres par l'emploi de mélangeurs-décanteurs au lieu des colonnes puisées, par le système d'alimentation des solutions actives (double air-lift à Eurochemic, pompes doseuses à EUREX et ITREC), head-end mécanique au lieu du dégainage chimique, installation des équipements pratiquement sur un plan horizontal au lieu d'une disposition à différents niveaux en conséquence du choix des colonnes puisées, etc.

Les connaissances concernant le procédé et la technologie acquises par la participa­ tion italienne à Eurochemic ont complété, d'une façon substantielle, celles tirées de l'expérience EUREX et ITREC. Mais j'estime, et mes collègues italiens seront cer­ tainement d'accord avec moi, que nous avons appris quelque chose de plus impor­ tant encore sur le plan professionnel , c'est à dire: une méthode de travail, soit dans la phase du projet, soit dans la phase de l'exploitation d'une usine de re- trai tement.

Pour la phase du projet, je voudrais souligner l'importance de la revision critique avant et pendant la construction de l'usine du projet détaillé et du fonctionnement des systèmes en conditions normales et accidentelles, des matériaux choisis, des spécifications adoptées pour la construction et finalement l'analyse détaillée des problèmes de sécurité.

Cette méthode, qui aujourd'hui rentre dans le cadre général des normes et des pro­ cédures de l'assurance de la qualité, a représenté un formidable instrument pour la bonne réussite du projet Eurechemic. Il a été pour nous tous une école très fructueuse et une 'expérience précieuse.

Dans ce contexte, je voudrais aussi rappel 1er les réunions de la Commission de sé­ curité, présidées par M. Rometsch, chaque vendredi après-midi, visant à la vérifi­ cation et la mise à jour des critères de sécurité adoptés.

Pour la phase de démarrage et de l'exploitation de l'usine, je voudrais remarquer que les principes adoptés pour l'organisation de travail dans l'usine, l'attribution très précise des responsabilités entre les différentes fonctions de la société, une capacité professionnelle très élevée du personnel ont été des facteurs déterminants qui ont permi l'exploitation avec succès et sans accident remarquable de l'usine d'Eurochemic. Nous avons adoptés les mêmes principes dans nos installations, avec les mêmes remarquables, résultats. 161

F. Marcus

I have to mention that this seminar on the Eurochemic experience was born m a discussion which I had at a waste symposium three years ago with Silvio Cao. At that occasion, we decided th.it we must take care of this experience from Euroche­ mic, so that it would not get lost

163

THE EVOLUTION OF NATIONAL POLICY IN THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY ON FUEL CYCLE AND RADWASTE MANAGEMENT

W. Schüller

Dear colleagues, I owe you an explanation why I have selected a subject like our national nuclear policy on spent fuel management for a panel session on the appli­ cation of Eurochemic experience. One reason is, that the Eurochemic venture was a technical project for a fuel reprocessing plant, as well as a political experiment in European collaboration. The creation of the Eurochemic convention as such was part of the national nuclear policies of the participating countries some 25 years age. The second reason is, and I have learned this during my 26 years of experi­ ence in the field, that fuel reprocessing cannot adequately be described as a com­ bination of chemical engineering and nuclear technology, but that one has to add politics as a third component. Therefore, reprocessing could be characterized as "nuclear chemical political engineering".

In fact, the national nuclear energy policy, at least in the Federal Republic of Germany, has had a stronger influence than anything ei.-,e on the development of both the reprocessing and waste management concepts and the distribution of res­ ponsibilities between government and different sectors of industry.

I believe it should be interesting, if time permitted, to compare the history and the present situation in our country with the international scene and to exchange our views on this matter during the discussion.

I will not start my comments without a short remark on the status of the repro­ cessing plant in Karlsruhe (WAK), which my company is operating. After the restart in October 1982, the WAK is now processing pressurized water reactor fuels of about 30,000 MWd/t with 84% availability. The operation of our plant involves about 450 people with an accident rate of only 45% of that of the chemical industry, with an occupational radiation dose of about 6% of the legal limits and radioactivity re­ leases to the environment in the percent range of the legal limits.

Now I will give you some comments on the following four items: At first, on the historical evolution of the aim of fuel reprocessing; secondly on the development of international collaboration; thirdly on the safety : 'ndrome and it? economic con­ sequences; and finally on the present policy and responsibilities in spent fuel management. 164

1. Historical Evolution

Irradiated fuel was first reprocessed for military purposes. This well known fact has, on the one hand, contributed a vast technological background from the repro­ cessing of some 100,000 tons of fuel by the Pure* process; on the other hand, it has attached a stigma of evil, at least in the eyes of many people, to this techno­ logy.

In addition, this military phase of reprocessing has focused the attention of early civilian reprocessing on fissile material recovery for economic purposes, neglecting the associated waste management. Economic targets were fixed - remember the famous 0.17 milis/kWh reprocessing cost of the Oak Ridge 1 t/d hypothetical plant - which may have covered the marginal cost of nitric acid for reprocessing in plants, which had already been financed from military budgets, but which had nothing to do with reality, let alone a sound industrial return on investment. This situation was predominant in the sixties and, in particular, it explains the adventure of the so-called "commercial reprocessing plants" at West Valley and Barnwell, as well as the 16 to 20 $/kg U reprocessing prices offered by the UKAEA, Eurochemic and WAK.

Well, we shared in this adventure and we concluded contracts at a price of 80 DM/ kg U (at this time that was 20 $). We are now processing some of that fuel in a plant the security guarding of which costs 315 DM/kg U.

In the early seventies, concurrent with the evolving concern for environmental pro­ tection, it was realized that waste conditioning and disposal had to be added to the reprocessing step to complete the picture of a responsible spent fuel management scheme. In the Federal Republic of Germany, we even created the new word "tntsor- gung" for this, reflecting the idea that a responsible utilization of nuclear energy requires "sup-ply" of fuel as well as "de-ply" of waste. This trend was so strong, that many people and policy makers forgot the recycle potential of reprocessing and judged its usefulness only from the point of view of waste management.

The most recent suggestion, logically enough along this line, is the conditioning of spent fuel for direct disposal as an alternative to reprocessing. There is no ob­ jection to this, and for many countries it may be a reasonable solution, provided the comparison of options is made properly. Reprocessing is both: recycling of energy raw materials and an important step of spent fuel management. One can neither compare it directly with a facility for spent fuel conditioning alone, nor with the market price of the uranium equivalent of recovered fissile material alone. 165

2. International Cooperation

Due to the fact that even a medium-sized reprocessing plant can handle the fuel of some 15 large power stations, any industrial activity in the back-end of the fuel cycle requires a relatively far advanced nuclear power programme. Even today, on­ ly Japan and the Federal Republic of Germany, among the non-nuclear weapon coun­ tries, have reached this state of development.

Therefore, it was quite logical, in the early phase of nuclear development, to look out for international collaboration in the reprocessing field. In fact, this was the basic idea of the Eurochemic convention, although participation of such countries as Austria, Denmark, Portugal and Turkey is better explained by the strong desire, during these days, to demonstrate European collaboration rather than by a techni­ cal or economical rationale.

The broad international company structure of Eurochemic turned out to be a problem when it came to set the frame for industrial activities. The countries with iarger nuclear programmes preferred to join in the United Reprocessors group and the two Eurochemic members among them decided to terminate their Eurochemic engagement. For a number of reasons which I will not analyze here, the United Reprocessors group did not develop into a "commercial" reprocessing company, wratever thi^ means. Today, international collaboration aims at bilateral agreements on a case- by-case basis.

In retrospect, I believe that the withdrawal from Eurochemic by the countries with substantial reprocessing requirements, in the light of what a Foratom working group characterized as "large excess reprocessing capacity", was not a prudent decision.

3. The Safety Syndrome and its Economic Consequences

During the late fifties and the sixties, nuclear energy was politically accepted. I would almost say that it was sexy. It was government-supported and the public did not engage in any controversial discussion on the subject. With the growing concern for environmental issues and for the social impact of complex technology, the scene changed dramatically. One psychological outlet of this uneasiness was the political request, that the safety of nuclear plants must have "absolute priority above all economical considerations". As it sometimes happens, these absolute re­ quirements develop in an unexpected way.

In consequence, the extensive safety precautions against even the remotest conceiva­ ble accident and the design criteria to protect the plants against externnl impacts, unparalleled in any industry, culminated in a cost explosion, for certain projects by a factor of five and more. 166

Among other things, this development withdrew the economic basis for the financing, by the chemical industry, of an industrial reprocessing plant, the services of which were to be offered to the utilities within a free market. As a result, the chemical industry renounced their plans for an industrial reprocessing plant, at the same time as the public began to realize that reprocessing was more than just an option for fissile material recovery, but part of responsible spent fuel management and therefore a corollary to nuclear energy generation.

This situation set the political frame for the so-called "Entsorgungs-Junk t im" by the federal government, birding the licensing of future nuclear power stations to the successive progress of spent fuel management, and applying the "polluter-pays- principle" to the back-end of the fuel cycle. Henceforth, the reactor operating utili­ ties were required to take over the job and they founded a subsidiary, DWK, who acquired the companies in which the reprocessing expertise up to that time was as­ sembled .

A. Present Policy and Distribution of Responsibilities

The responsibility for radioactive waste management in the Federal Republic of Ger­ many, and in particular spent fuel management, is now shared between the govern­ ment and industry, in that the utilities take care of reprocessing and waste condi­ tioning, respectively the conditioning of spent fuel for direct disposal, whereas the federal government is in charge of ultimate waste disposal in one of the federal repositories under exploration or construction. The cost for the entire "Entsorgung", including the government activities, has to be carried by the utilities and subse­ quently by the electricity consumer.

It should be recalled that the nuclear kWh, comprising the complete fuel cycle and including ultimate waste disposal and nuclear pl^nt decommissioning, is still compe­ titive by a margin of A to 5 pfennig per kWh for electricity base load as compared to coal fired stations, supplied by indigenous coal. But even on the basis of im­ ported coal in our country, there is a significant cost advantage for nuclear power.

Only recntly the public becomes aware of the fact that nuclear energy does not really face an unsolved "Entsorgungsproblem". It is the power generation from fos­ sil fuels which presents the real environmental problems.

Some antinuclear people have compared the nuclear situaton, particularly in the field of "Entsorgung", with an airplane which flies and needs an airfield to be built in haste to be able to land. This picture is wrong, because a plane which is airbound has started on an airf^jld and on the same field it can land. And if you apply this pir.tui to reproecs'ïl .9, the fact is that several years before the 167

first nuclear power station went on line in 1956 (Calder hall), the Purex technology was applied on a large scale in Savannah River and Idaho, although in the mili­ tary field.

We have to infcrrr. the public about the situation, and this is what I call the poli­ tical component. Without engagement in this field, nuclear technology will not be able to solve our energy problems.

F. Marcus

Thank you for your clear and pedagogical way of "elating the E^urochemic experien­ ce to the German "Entsorgungsconcept" and fuel cycle policy. You did not bring any illustrations, and probably Asyee didn't either. I brought along an illustration from a paper which Asyee and 1 presented at Geneva in the sixties. At that time, the cost of reprocessing, including transportation, was calculated to vary between 20 and liO $ per kg. Times have changed !

169

APPLICATION OF EUROCHEMIC EXPERIENCE AT URENCO

J. Asyee

I learned from the chairman that I was not to talk about the good time we h^ue spent here in Mol, but to assess the experience I gained during the sixties at Eurochemic, and to tell what experience is still of value in my current occupation. It seems to me that my experience at Eurochemic is very personal and not of very much general use, considering the type of work I was involved in here and what I am doing right now. As you may know, I joined the Urenco organisation in 1975 and I am involved in the marketing of uranium enrichment services based on the centrifuge technology.

There is probably no more technical similarity between enrichment and reprocessing than that both centrifuges and pulsed columns have a cylindrical shape. At the time I joined Urenco, the centrifuge had already a cylindrical shape, so there was really not much technical experience that I could contribute.

At Eurochemic I was very happily involved in convincing nuclear utilities to bring their spent fuel to Eurochemic for reprocessing. That was for me the beginning of some very valuable contacts. Some of them are still extremely valuable today. How­ ever, today's marketing in the nuclear field is extremely difficult as compared to the situation two decades ago, mainly because of the dramatic cuts in the nuclear programmes worldwide.

At that time, prices and pricing were not taken very seriously. I still remember that in those days BNFL maintained that they could make profits with a reprocess­ ing price of 16 $ per kg uranium. Today, these issues are extremely important. On the one hand, profitability is a basic requirement; on the other hand, low costs are required to be able to increase the market share.

During many sessions at the ENEA in Paris, I started to understand how legal minds work (I am not suggesting that unti' then I only could think of illegalities). I remember that we used to leave the discussion of "non-conformity" of fuels to the lawyers. And it was interesting to see how they could construct highly unlikely scenarios. Since then, I am inclined to distinguish between two categories of lawyers: the pragmatic ones, and the others. And I would like to add that pragma­ tism, generally speaking, works very well. 170

From an organizational point of view, there are marked differences between Urenco and Eurochemic. There is a substantial decentralization in the three participating countries of Urenco: Germany, Holland and England. There are a dozen or so manu­ facturing, research, administration and production centres, and unlike Eurochemic, Urenco has the character of a federation. Being ten years younger than Eurochemic, Urenco still behaves as a teenager from time to time.

Politics and governments were already mentioned this afternoon as important fac­ tors. Right from the onset, the Urenco technology was classified. That implies secu­ rity clearance for staff, constraints in the dispatch of certain documents, and more important still: severe restrictions in allowing prospective customers to visit pro­ duction plants. Also governmental approval is required for Urenco to offer its en­ richment services to a given country. I would like to emphasize, however, that the three governments in these matters are behaving very reasonably and constructively and in a predictable manner. I would also like to emphasize that the governmental involvement does not mean that Urenco is a subsidized operation. The company, like any privately owned organization, has only one objective: to make profits.

That is not a very easy task, as there is a substantial overcapacity for enrichment services and quite some stockpile from earlier overproduction. The centrifuge pro­ cess has certain advantages to offer in this context. Firstly, the process consumes a factor 25 less energy than the classical ditfusion process. And further the possi­ bility of modular extension enables us to match supply and demand considerably better.

Coupled with our R t> D achievements, we are doing reasonably well, as we are very competitive and expect to remain so for a long time to come. Our current ca­ pacity serves some 10,000 MW of nuclear power. We will double this capacity within the next three years. Worldwide capacity today is some forty times larger, whilst world demand to date is not even half that figure. Nevertheless, our market objec­ tive is to secure 15% of the world market by 1995, to bring our annual turnover in the order of a billion dollars, whilst aiming at a profit margin of 20%.

Perhaps one more point of common interest belween enrichment and reprocessing and a technical aspect worth mentioning is that we have successfully carried out a number of tests to show that centrifuge enrichment of reprocessed uranium is very well feasable at very reasonable additional costs. It is certainly too early to spe­ culate about the future role for centrifuge enrichment in closinq the fuel cycle. So far it is clear now that the enrichment step will not cause technological or econo­ mical obstacles.

It was a pleasure to be allowed to say i\ few words here. I know I did not comply with the instruction to nsscss the impact of experience gained cit Eurochcrnic . How- 171

ever, I would like to finish with the suggestion that the most important experience gained was the making of many international friends, friendships that I consider indispensable in an international business like our nuclear business.

173

SPENT FUEL TRANSPORTATION - MORE THAN 20 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE

H. Keese

After my six years at Eurochemic and an intermediate period during which I dealt with uranium and plutonium brokerage at the Nuclear Fuel Services Department of Nukem, I joined another field of activity which is adjacent to reprocessing: the field of nuclear transportation. The importance of this transport activity can best be seen in a graph of the nuclear fuel cycle (figure 1), where the different posi­ tions are connected by the lines o* transport. Without these connecting transport lines, the whole fuel cycle falls ar,art (figure 2). You can certainly imagine that we in a group of international nuclear ^•^•^••^••^^•^•^"^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ URANIUM MINING transport companies are also convinced ANO MILLING of this and promulgate this point. UF, PRODUCTION

When we look at the spent fuel which ISOTOPIC _, DEPLETE DUF. ENRICHMENT -^ STORAGE was shipped to Eurochemic, we realize that there is quite a variety of sizes, FUEL FABRICATION burn-ups, activities, etc. Quite a few experimental reactors were served with LLW i WASTE fuel burn-up figures ranging between ""• TREATMENT

15 MWd/t and 17,000 MWd/t. Normally LIW these types of fuel did not need big Pu FUEL FINAL flasks. STORAGE RE PROCESSING DISPOSAL

The TN-1 {figure 3) is a small first generation flask. It weighs about 20 t, has a heat capacity of 5 kW and is lead shielded. It was built in 1966 and mainly used for the Diorit shipments from Switzerland and the VAK fuel from Germany to Eurochemic.

Figure 1: The nuclear fuel cycle with transportation.

Figure 2: The nuclear fuel cycle without t ranspnrtat, ion. 174

Later, it also accomodated some MTR fuel, and with rcquK-ir thorou<|h technical checks and maintenance it is still in operation today. The same is true for the

French Pégase, a similar type of flask which has been oMonsiv ek used for the French MTR fuel .

Tne TN-7 fiask was used for the FR-2 and the Otto Hahn fue's. Th,. tt-nn^fer of fuel from the nuclear ship Otto Hahn to Eurochemic required an intermediate transfer- by barge (fi gure 4).

A new generation of reactors required another type of Flasks. These reactors were for example Trino, Italy; Sena, Belgium; KRB, Germany. The new flask to serve them was the TN-2. The TN-2 is a dry flask, i.e. it has no water filling, with a lead shielding. It weighs 32 t and has a capacity of about 1.2 t. It has 15 kW of heat dissipation, which was rather much at the- end of the sixties. Because of the still rather low fuel burn-up of about 20,000 MWd/t maximum, it needed no neutron shielding. 175

The TN-2 was easily shipped on a broad trailer and offered quite a flexible use. Figure 5 shows the flask on the trailer at the Eurochemic plant entrance. The 16,000 cooling pins of the TN-2 were a nightmare for the operators, because of de­ contamination problems. This difficulty was later overcome by the use of a plastic skirt.

At about this stage of transport technology, Eurochemic ceased to accept fuel and stopped its operation. However, the development did net stop. Other flasks came into operation for a number of reasons: bigger reactors were built with larger fuel and higher burn-up, more capacity was requested and all-steel flasks appeared on the scene.

A new series of flasks became operational since the early seventies. The biggest of them is the TN-12 (figure 6), a whole steel flask, which holds more than 6 tonnes uranium, weighs 110 tonnes. It has a neutron shielding and a heat dissipation of up to 120 kW. It is usually shipped by rail or by boat.

This type of flask was standardized in order to comply with the acceptance criteria for the reprocessing plant of Cogéma in La Hague. Figure 7 shows the design features. Today, about 60 flasks of this type, and a smaller 80 t version are operational, under construction or on order worldwide. They are used between Japan and Europe and for the shipment of spent fuel from European reactors to the Cogéma and BNFL reprocessing plant?.

Figure 3 (far left): The TN-1, a small first generation flask.

Figure U (left): The TN-1, used for the shipment of FR-2 and Otto Hahn fuels.

Figure 5 fright): The TN-2 in front of Eurochemic 's fuel reception and storage building. 176

Until now, more than 1,750 t uranium of spent oxide fuel have been shipped in these and other flasks of British design. Annual shipments in Europe range between 400 and 500 t uranium.

The smaller version of the TN-12, the TN-17 flask, has successfully been used in various reactors (figure 8). The outside protection during operation is secured by a metallic skirt. Operations have achieved a high standard routine level with regular short turn-around times.

The TN-17 is a flask which fully complies with the handling specifications of the Eurochemic plant. I am looking forward to the moment when the first flask of that type will unload its spent fuel into the new Eurochemic reception pond for a new operation of the plant.

4fM

.fln 177

Figure 6 (left): StoAdompter JIlNffl '»hOCh ObtO'b*' / plug co The TN-12, the biggest r,nQ ''inga of the new flasks, Ab»c»w«i»toptjr ttiicidng plug holding 6 t U. Oïtnung

Figure 7 (right): Design features of I,n% the TN-12.

Figure 8 (down): Design features of the TN-17, complying f iQttif fjng with the handling d adding specifications of Eurochemic.

Ot*nung Ofif.c»

»»M

TN 12L Tronsportbeholter ™15 Transport Cask I COGEMA Version)

179

USE OF EUROCHEMIC EXPERIENCE IN A CONVENTIONAL ELECTRIC POWER STATION

J. Klitgaard

Of the persons in this panel, I am the one who uses least of the technics I know­ ledge gained at Eurochemic. On the other hand, I am an example of how some of us had to leave the nuclear field, since it did not develop like we thought it would in the early sixties.

It all started well. I worked here at Eurochemic for alm.ist six years, with a few stays at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, and then I returned to what was at that time the Danish Nuclear Research Centre at Risö, which is today the National Erergy Research Centre, '.o work on chemistry problems related to the reactor study projects made there. Shortly afterwards, I started part-time teaching at the Tech­ nical University of Denmark. It was a nuclear chemical engineering course, and I could not find a textbook which contained all the things I wanted to teach the students, so I had to write it myself. A lot of the Eurochemic experience was put into it and passed on to the students. Even the Eurochemic flowsheets were in­ cluded !

But I wanted a more practical job. So, in 1971, I joined six Danish power compa­ nies to head a joint chemistry department they were establishing. They thought they would go nuclear, and I felt it interesting to participate in the planning and learn as much as possible from the conventional plants.

But the nuclear plant never came into being. And that was due to public resistance and to the fact that there was no real nee I for capacity. So I grew more and more "fossil". At that time, more than 80% of the energy used in the plants came from oil, the rest from coal. Since 1973, however, there has been a shift - as far as I know, a world record - to more than 90% coal. That means that I ha^e worked with the chemistry of the three most important primary fuels: uranium, oil and coal.

Detailed knowledge of all three of them is very often useful, and not many have the chance to acquire that knowledge. Mostly it can be used in safety and environ­ mental matters. Since today's practice in handling these matters was developed to a big extent in the nuclear sector, I c&n use the methodology learned at Euro- 180

chemie in my present work. And when it comes to coal firea plants, I can also use somp of the technics learned, when dealing with radioactivity in smoke gasses and in ash. Ash is interesting both when working at disposal problems and when work­ ing at the possible use of it in concrete, bricks, etc.

My concentration on coal during the last almost ten years has carried me into in­ ternational standardization work on coal. Today that is definitely the work where my Eurochemic experience helps me the most. I understand that this panel should not focus on how we learned to cooperate internationally. However, it is mostly for that that I will always remember the happy years with Eurochemic. 181

WHAT THE STAFF OF A LICENSING AUTHORITY COULD HAVE GAINED FROM BEING EMPLOYED BY EUROCHEMIC

W. Hunzinner

Ladies and gentlemen, I first must apologize. I have no slides and I have no transparencies. But I hope anyway that what I 'm going to say is transparent b> itself.

You might know that I left Eurochemic at the end of 1970 for the Federal adminis­ tration in Switzerland. There my responsibility until very recently covered radiolo­ gical protection within the country for all nuclear and radiation applications, ex­ cluding nuclear power production. It is only after some time as a civil servant that I fully realized the value of my stay at Eurochemic.

Let me sum up this experience for you by answering the question: "What kind of a professional career should a nuclear engineer have before he joins a governmen­ tal licensing body ?"

After his university graduation, the engineer's first job should preferably be in research. Here he will learn to think, work and act independently. This stage should last some ten years.

After that, he should profitably join a rigid, hierarchical industrial organization in whatever field and position. In this job he will be trained to follow strictly the rules others have set up. This second stage should again last approximately ten years.

After that, he should again experience in a large scale nuclear chemical plant like the Eurochemic reprocessing facility which handles megacurie quantities of radio­ active material in unsealed form. This will provide him with the necessary scale and judgement for the safety requirements when licensing laboratories designed to handle some microcuries of radioactive material.

I believe that such a career might in fact also contribute substantially to speeding up the licensing procedure for a nuclear installation.

183

APPLICATION OF EXPERIENCE GAINED AT EUROCHEMIC IN CRITICAL ITY CRONTOL, SHIELDING AND NUCLEAR SAFETY

H. Ziind

I went to Eurochemic in 1964. I was employed as a criticality engineer and I came right from school. It was a real challenge in retrospect. And this challenge was threefold.

First of all, the challenge of criticality control was a speciality of which all people felt they did not know anything, so they did not mix in my business. On the other side, I have to admit that I mixed in the business of other people and became quite involved in the process, in the layout and even in manufacturing. And this brought me in close contact with all the responsible engineers in Euro­ chemic at that time.

Second, I just happened to be there in the most interesting phase. It was the last phase of low-enrichment process design. It was the phase in which design changes to high-enriched uranium were made, in which criticality control was supposed quite important. And afterwards it was the commissioning and the operation phase.

And third but not least: I happened to have excellent superiors. Dr. Schüller, my boss at Nuclear Services Division at that time, was an excellent teacher. He had a very broad view, already at that time, and he had the courage to delegate to a young engineer quite some responsibility. Dr. Barendregt, as most people, accept­ ed advice in criticality control. Sometimes, however, I wasted some by-words at the operation.

When leaving Eurochemic, Dr. Rometsch told me that I could be nearly sure that there will never be a reprocessing plant in Switzerland. I decided to go back to Switzerland nevertheless and use the Eurochemic experience on nuclear safety and what I had seen of chemical engineering and plant design in the best possible way. So I joined a company which I had not known before: Motor Columbus Consult­ ing Engineers. This company is active worldwide as an architect-engineer and a consultant in the energy field, for energy production, energy distribution and ener­ gy applications. I contributed to build up the nuclear division, which nowemploys a technical staff of 200 internationally active as architect-engineer and consultant for nuclear power plants, waste management, fuel cycle plants and environmental engineering. 5 APPLICATION OF EXPERIENCE GAINED AT EUROCHEMIC

ENGINEERI NG NON-TECHNICAL

Experience r gained at Nuclear Safety | Chem. Engineering Plant Design General Management International | I Work .Eurochemic Technical Cooperation | I outside I lEurochemic

Nuclear power plants I

I V) Safety concept | Waste processing Layout 4> US and | Safety analysis | Equipment design Maintenance ~ European | Rules and | Corrosion problems In-service safety 1 "c5 Regulations | Inspection •o o requirements | 4> Shielding | Fuel storage C & handling fl (0 c Quality control 4> VO l/l Waste disposal Various activities for NAGRA c £ o and utilities (CH, D, Argentine) !/> ** I i>UI i Environmental engin. Siting | Radio-ecology |

I ratio n Fuel cycle activities Analysis WAK | Contracts a Licensing | for 8 of Gorleben | utilities u

roratom Unipede waste Knowledge of | study nuclear act i - | activities in | Europe |

Swiss national waste Knowhow of reprocessing, waste disposal concept handling and treatment, Pu I 185

The applications of experience gained at Eurochemic during the last 16 years are highlighted in the annexed table.

As regards safety concepts and outlook: Dr. Rometsch has given a good outlook: How to start with criteria, a concept, and then with design, and then with the analysis. This is always the same, also for nuclear power plants. What was not commonly recognized at that time was the importance of balanced safety require­ ments. And that reminds me that we made for Eurochemic, and probably not all of you do know that, a complete risk analysis on a probabilistic method. And I think that I contributed to introduce this risk analysis approach in Switzerland, and later on in Germany to some extent.

As regards the chemical engineering of nuclear plants and waste processing plants, one has to specify equipment and corrosion problems. And in relation to equipment design, I often think of two lessons learned:

First: Never use an untested piece of equipment. I will never forget the moment when we opened the oven in which we tested the epoxy with a borax mix, which would be used as a neutron shielding in the second dissolver. What we saw was not a block anymore, but something like a flower, because the borax contains some crystallized water, and under the 200° C everythinq came out.

Second: Never give all the tolerances away. i.e. always use some reserves to cover eventu of fabrication and forgotten effects, i think that if we had not used reserves in criticality ^ontrol, and had taken the ideal situation which has been described by the process people, we would have had tremendous problems. And this is still true. Whenever we had problems in the design later on, also in nuclear power plants, it was because we did not follow one of these two lessons learned.

Now, plant design, layout, maintenance and in-service, they are extremely similar. I nad the occasion to nose about through the whole plant, and I think there is no line and no equipment switch which I did not touch. In-service inspection was to some extent already requested at that time. It is very important in nuclear power plants and in fuel storage and handling.

We have various waste disposal activities, in which I can always use my waste experience from Eurochemic. As to environmental engineering, in fact, when design­ ing nuclear power plants, we have just the same problems as we had at Euroche­ mic: problems with dispersion of radioactivity in water and in air. But I think the most wide application of the knowledge I gathered at Eurochemic occurs in the fuel cycle activities, when making safety analyses, comparing the requirements for a nuclear power pant with those for a reprocessing plant, which has a much slower 186

attitude of reaction - about 10,000 times slower than in nuclear power plants - and therefore does not need so many redundancies.

Beside my professional duties, I have participated in the Foratom Unipede waste study, which was edited by Franz Marcus. There were other people of the panel in this group. And I contributed to the Swiss national waste disposal concept. When work for Nagra was started, a v oncept was made including everything: reprocess­ ing, waste handling... We went to have a closed fuel cycle.

I should add perhaps the activities in public information. It always feels good when you hear all those critical people and you can say: I worked in a reprocess­ ing plant and I'm still alive !

There are some general lessons I took from Eurochemic, which have nothing to do with technology, for instance: communication. It is of prime importance and com­ prises more than just the language. There were sixteen nationalities at Eurochemic. So I learned quite well to see that people are thinking a bit differently and I might give one example which remained in my mind.

I once found a man in his office, having a letter of Saint-Gobain in his hand. It read: "Nous préférons la solution que vous avez primitivement proposée." The man was very angry that the architect-engineer could come to the idea to say that he had proposed a "primitive solution". However, we decided to look it up in the dic­ tionary, and of course found out that "primitivement" means just "originally". And there the problem was solved. That was one example illustrating that there are very few differing opinions, but plenty of misunderstandings.

And then there was a second rule which I took from Eurochemic. I can't remember a single occasion when I was leaving the office of Dr. Schüller, or Dr. Barendregt, or Dr. Rometsch that I didn't know what to do afterwards. I didn't always agree with their decisions, but I had one. And this helped me a lot later on, when I was working in organizations where decisions were made.

I want to thank all of you, for the confidence and the encouragement which you gave to an extremely young engineer at those times. 187

EUROCHEMIC AND THE BELGIAN NUCLEAR PROGRAMME

P. Dejonghe

First of all. my thanks to Mr. Marcus, who considers me as a member of the gang of Eurochemic. Anyway, it has been a pleasure for more than ten years now that we have served in various working groups of Eurochemic, as an assistant first of Mr. Coessens and later on of Mr. Frerotte.

Together with the option for nuclear energy in Belgium, in the early fifties, it was also decided to develop industrial activities in the nuclear fuel cycle, already then, in particular the fabrication of uranium fuel. Of course we realized that there was a management to do ir the radioactive waste field. And later on came reprocessing and also the fabrication of plutonium fuel.

It is in this context that the SCK/CEN has started, already in the mid-fifties, some work on fuel dissolution and extraction, fabrication and application of plutonium containing fuel (joint programme with Belgonucléaire), fabrication of uranium fuel (together with MMN) and treatment of low-level radioactive wastes.

Whereas the development o* these programmes and services at the SCK/CEN served in favour of the selection of the Mol-Dessel site for the implantation of the Euro­ chemic plant, the existence of the latter plant in turn had a stimulating effect on a number of activities at the SCK/CEN and on the Belgian industry.

I will restrict my comments to some specific examples.

1. R & D in Reprocessing

The existence of Eurochemic kept the interest of the SCK/CEN for reprocessing vivid. Soon after the original Purex nucleus of the SCK/CEN - which was then already led by Mr. Deti lieux - was transferred to Eurochemic, the SCK/CEN embarked on the de­ velopment of alternative routes for reprocessing, essentially the dry reprocessing approach by fluoride volatility. There has been some believe - not only in Belgium - that fluoride volatility would be THE method for the reprocessing of certain fuels like the fast breeder fuel. I remember that at that time it was still the intention to reprocess such fuel after very short cooling periods. I remember werk;. 188

However, together with the results obtained by the Pure* scheme, also at Euroche­ mic, the advantages of fluoride volatility became much less evident. And the delays in the fast breeder programmes finally led to a discontinuation of that effort.

During later years, and until today, the SCK/CEN has concentrated its development programme in the field of reprocessing on a few specific items related to aqueous reprocessing of spent first cycle fuel, recycle fuel and also fast breeder fuel. We believe that most of this work is of direct interest for the reopening of the Euro­ chemic plant. This programme was very actively continued, also during the years of major uncertainty about the future of the Eurochemic company, that is since 1971.

The following items were studied in particular: the chopping of fuel pins; the dis­ solution of fuel with high plutonium content; the development of a super dissolver for the treatment of the insoluble residue , using low concentrations of HF ; the pu­ rification of off-gases, in particular the retention of iodine, condensation and dis­ tillation of krypton by cryogenic methods; the conditioning of hulls; the separation of tritium from liquid effluents, etc.

Let me remind here That, already in 1960, we succeeded in the separation of stron­ tium and cesium from high-level waste, using then inorganic ion exchangers.

2. Plutonium Fuel

A second field of particular interest is that of the plutonium fuel. With the devel­ opment of fabrication techniques for plutonium fuel (e.g. for recycling in light water reactors) and of the ideas concerning non-proliferation, it became evident that technical links exist between reprocessing 3nd plutonium fuel fabrication and vice versa. A market for plutonium fuel needs an appropriate infrastructure for the reprocessing of spent recycle fuel. The idea was thus born that a reopened Euro­ chemic plant would perhaps also serve for the reprocessing of special fuel, among which the recycle fuel would possibly take a special place.

3. Geological Disposal

A third field of interest related to reprocessing and the existence of Eurochemic here is that of geo'.ogical disposal. When it became evident that no member country of Eurochemic - and we regretted that - was happy to take the wastes from Euro­ chemic for final storage, moreover when it became evident that wastes resulting from the reprocessing of Belgian fuel in other countries would have to be returned to our country, the need was felt to actively and rapidly embark upon a programme on geological disposal in Belgium. 189

In collaboration with the European Community and the Geological Survey of Belgium, the Boom clay, which is currently found here at a depth of about 250 m, was se­ lected as a first choice formation for the geological disposal in Belgium. That was in the early seventies. Since that time, much laboratory and field work has been done. And we are now in the final phase of the construction of an underground la­ boratory (a tunnel of 3.5 m diameter and 30 m length) in the Boom clay at a depth of 225 m, a few hundred meters from the future vitrification plants. We hope that within a few years a feasibility and safety file will be produced, allowing the authorities to decide.

4. Radioactive Waste

Perhaps a fourth area of interest could be other activities in the field of radio­ active waste treatment and management that we have developed, for instance: the high temperature slagging incinerator of low-level plutonium contaminated waste, and the characterization of conditioned wastes: borosilicate glasses, high tempera­ ture slags and bituminized wastes.

The latter programmes are also being performed with the help of the European Community.

This short review may illustrate that, although not many formal arrangements have been made between Eurochemic and the SCK/CEN, except of course in matters of treatment of low-level wastes, radiological protection and reprocessing of fuel from our reactors, both institutes have influenced each other continuously, and of course in the first place for us in the R&D field.

The presence of the reprocessing facility has also pldyed a role in e few essential industrial options: the plutonium fuel; certainly the waste management option for high-level waste and for medium-level waste; and then the continuation of a repro­ cessing plant in Belgium. In the latler respect, the eventual reopening of the re­ processing facilities would certainly be the most efficient and complete valorization of the experience and knowhow accumulated at Eurochernic and also in the SCK/CEN ^ei^earch and development teams. L 191

Conclusions of the 3rd Session

Franz Marcus

From this panel of ten we have now had ample examples on quite different ways how the Eurochemic experience has been used. We are many other persons here who could also have contributed with our own personal experience. For my own part, I have used it both on the professional side, for example as a consultant for the IAEA on waste questions, and on the organizational level, in my present, job as the coordinator of joint nuclear activities between the four Nordic countries.

Instead of opening for more personal views, at this time I prefer to attempt to for­ mulate what would be my conclusions from this session. As far as I can see, we can group the Eurochemic experience into three different categories.

The first one consists of the experience on the technical side, related to the fuel cycle. Into this category we could also include economics, and furthermore those nuclear questions which are slightly more political than technical. This experience has been useful directly in reprocessing, in transportation, waste management and even enrichment. More general, it has been used on the engineering side, in the development of safety philosophy, in risk analysis, in safeguards, and the methodo­ logy has been transferred to non-nuclear areas.

The second category is the one of international cooperation. The personal relations established through work at Eurochemic, and the positive approach to international cooperation are two factors that have contributed to establish useful business rela­ tions. They have also been an important basis for the relations on a political level between many of the persons in the nuclear community throughout Europe.

I would suggest to call the third category of experience the "human relations". It concerns the understanding which one acquires from working together with other nationalities, from the way they behave, how they speak, how they react. And in turn the respect for other viewpoints, for other ways of behaviour, and the ability to communicate across the barriers of language, leading to a mutual understanding and the ability to work together towards common goals.

I am sure that much more could be added. Let me instead now thank our trn speakers for the individual and personal way in which they have contributed and thereby close this session. Fourth Session CONCLUSIONS

Chairman

Emile Det iI Ieux Manager of Eurochemic

Speakers

Yves SousseIier Chairman of Eurochemic's Technical Committee CEA, CEN de Fontenay-aux-Roset. Coordination Déchets

Sven Terjesen Member of Eurochemic's Board of Liquidators Research manager, Norsk Hydro, Porsgrun, Norway

WiI helm Heinz Former member of Eurochemic's Board of Directors Managing director of WAK, Karlsruhe, Germany & Rolf-Peter Rand I Member of Eurochemic's Board of Liquidators Head of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Section, BMFT, Germany

Marcel Frerotte Member of Eurochemic's Board of Liquidators 193

EUROCHEMIC ET LA COOPERATION INTERNATIONALE DANS LE RETRAITEMENT

Yves Sousselier

En 1956 l'énergie nucléaire suscitait un enthousiasme extraordinaire et était consi­ déré comme un atout majeur de développement industriel. Bien que l'on n'en soit alors qu'à la construction des tout premiers réacteurs prototypes de puissance, bien que l'on ne puisse avoir des données précises sur les coûts. Bien que l'on ne soupçonne pas certaines difficultés. Bien que l'on ne prévoyait guère de diffi­ cultés d'approvisionnement pour les autres sources d'énergie, tous les pays voulai­ ent se doter de réacteurs de puissance. Extrêmement peu alors étaient décidés à ignorer les promesses de l'atome.

On considérait aussi de façon quasi unanime alors le retraitement comme un prolon­ gement normal des réacteurs. Il est vrai que certains des combustibles envisagés (métallique - gaine magnésium) en entraînaient pratiquement la nécessité. Il est vrai que l'on se fixait alors comme but - dont on était encore loin - une valeur de 10.000 MWJ/t comme taux d'irradiation, laissant une valeur non négligeagle à l'uranium encore enrichi contenu dans le comhustible usé.

Mais l'on se rendait déjà compte qu'il n'était guère possible ni raisonnable que chaque pays voulant se doter de reactuers de puissance construise sa propre usine de retraitement. Chaque usine aurait été de bien faible capacité et puis l'on con­ naissait peu de choses sur le retraitement, bien qu'un certain coin du voile ait été levé lors de la conférence de Genève en 1955. Même après le premier symposium sur le retraitement, qui s'est tenu à Bruxelles en 1957, on voyait clairement que l'expérience, même quand elle était disponible, était très limitée, et on était con­ scient que les installations de retraitement que l'on construirait alors auraient né­ cessairement le caractère de pilote.

C'est donc assez logiquement que l'idée d'une coopération internationale dans le domaine du retraitement est née, assez logiquement que les conclusions du syndicat d'étude ont été suivies et que l'on s'est lancé dans la réalisation d'une unité de retraitement, jouant d'abord le rôle de pilote et ensuite celui d'assurer le retraite­ ment industriel, ainsi que d'un ensemble associé de recherches et de développement. 194

Il faut bien s'attarder un peu sur le formidable pari que cela représentait. La coopération internationale en matière de recherche et de développement industriel était alors surtout limitée aux liens entre maison mère et filiales, les réalisations d'ensemble industriel sur le plan international n'existaient pratiquement pas. Et l'on voulait faire tout cela djns un domaine où beaucoup d'éléments manquaient, réaliser quelque chose qui représentait un progrès par rapport à ce qui existait. Et en plus, et non des moindres, s'élevait l'obstacle des langues différentes.

1. Les réalisations d'Eurochemic

Ces paris ont été tenus. L'usine a été construite en un temps de moins de cinq ans, le laboratoire de recherche et de développement plus rapidement encore. Mais il faut surtout souligner combien effectif a été le caractère international de ces réalisations. Dix architectes industriels de sept pays différents ont pu effectivement se répartir les tâches sous la coordination d'un architecte industriel principal. Pour les principaux matériels des appels d'offre ont été lancés dans les pays mem­ bres et pratiquement des industries de tous les pays membres ont participé à la fourniture de matériel. Si pour le montage les entreprises du pays hôte ont tout à fait normalement réalisé la partie principale, plusieurs entreprises de plusieurs pays membres y ont aussi collaboré.

L'usine a fonctionné et a été capable de traiter 200 tonnes de combustibles irradiés et cela grâce a une équipe d'encadrement dans laquelle étaient largement repré­ sentés les différents pays d'Eurochemic. En y incluant les chercheurs de grade uni­ versitaire, i I y a eu environ 90 ingénieurs et universitaires venant de quinze pays différents dans l'usine et les laboratoires.

2. L'acquis d'Eurochemic

Il est surtout intéressant de voir quel a été l'acquis d'Eurochemic. Qu'est-ce que cette construction et cette exploitation ont apporté et dans cet acquis, qu'est-ce que l'on peut considérer comme ayant été dû au caractère international ? Nous examinerons successivement trois domaines: l'usine (1), la recherche et le dévelop­ pement (2) et la formation et l'information (3).

2.1 L'usine

La marche de l'usine a permis de montrer l'efficacité des colonnes puisées pour le retraitement des combustibles à taux d'irradiation relativement élevé; la marche d'une centrifugeuse en actif; l'efficacité du système des prises d'échantillon, et même l'efficacité du dégainage chimique dans le cas des gainages en acier inoxy­ dable. 135

S'jr le plan des résultats, on a pu montrer la possibilité de retraiter des combus­ tibles à taux d'irradiation élevé, celle de traiter dans une même usine des combus­ tibles aussi différents que ceux des réacteurs à eau légère ou des réacteurs de re­ cherche du type MTR.

D'importants renseignements ont été acquis sur la comptabilité des matières fissiles et, c'était aussi une nouveauté, sur les valeurs du MUF et son évolution.

Un des principaux renseignements a peut-être été la démonstration de la possibilité de faire fonctionner une usine de retraitement en ne rejetant que des quantités ex­ cessivement .imitées d'effluents radioactifs liquides. Et cela avait été mis en doute au moment de la construction par un certain nombre d'experts, qui avaient résisté le choix du site de Mol à cause de l'absence d'un fleuve ou d'une mer au voisi­ nage.

Certes, des échecs se sont produits et des difficultés sont survenues. Mais il ne faut pas oublier que c'était un des buts de la réalisation, c'est de connaître les difficultés et encore plus la façon de les résoudre. Et là encore, la gamme est large.

Il y avait les problèmes posés par le bouchage des tuyauteries par des précipités et la mise au point d'un système de débouchage très efficace; il y avait les pro­ blèmes posés par les déchets solides et la nécessité de réaliser un système complet de conditionnement. On peut aussi mentionner le cas du dégainage chimique des gaines en zircaloy, qui s'est révélé à la fois difficile sur le plan du procédé et génératrice de déchets de volume et d'activité importants.

La décontamination de l'usine et le démontage de certaines parties ont également constitué un apport extrêmement important. Ne serait-ce que par la démonstration apportée de la possibilité de décontaminer pratiquement entièrement la totalité d'une usine de retraitement, y compris les évaporateurs de produits de fission.

Enfin, la réalisation et la mise en exploitation d'un stockage de longue durée pour les fûts de bitume d'activité moyenne ont constitué, sinon une première mondiale, une démonstration à grande échelle de la faisabilité et de la sûreté de tels stock­ ages.

2.2 Recherche et développement

Si lors des premières années les recherches et le développement ont surtout porté sur la mise au point des procédés de l'usine, des recherche:, spécifiques intéres­ sâmes ont pu être menées ensuite, malgré d" . moyen., n-\ ,it i vit» :i I limités, le ( ro i • 196

qu'il faut se rappeler que bien que peu des recherches et des travaux de dévelop­ pement qui se sont réalisés à Eurochemic se soient traduits par des réalisations effectives, beaucoup ont été à la base de certains développements, comme par exem­ ple l'enrobage métallique de déchets de haute activité. D'autres, comme le procédé Lotes, on reconnaîtra l'intérêt un jour au l'autre, tandis que te procédé Eurowatt a été mis en application et semble intéresser certains pays.

2.3 Formation et information

Mais c'est probablement dans le domaine de la formation et de l'information que les résultats d'Eurochemic ont été les plus probants. C'est à Eurochemic que se sont formés, au moins en partie, une bonne fraction des spécialistes en matière de retraitement de la plupart des pays européens. Les installations d'Eurochemic ont été beaucoup plus largement ouvertes aux visiteurs étrangers que les installa­ tions nationales. Le nombre impressionant de visiteurs qui ont reçu souvent plus d'informations qu'ils n'en recevaient par ailleurs me paraît avoir été un acquis extrêmement important dans la vie d'Eurochemic. Enfin, la publication de 300 rap­ ports, largement diffusés auprès des actionnaires, constitue aussi un apport indis­ cutable d'Eurochemic.

3. La coopération internationale d'Eurochemic

Tout cet acquis s'est fait dans un cadre de coopération internationale. Mais s'est- il réalisé grâce à ce cadre et indépendamment de ce cadre, ou malgré ce cadre ? Cette coopération a-t-elle apporté un acquis supplémentaire ? Il semble bien que cela ait été le cas dans plusieurs domaines.

Nous avons cité déjà l'importance de la diffusion d'informations obtenues à Euro­ chemic, mais il faut se rappeler qu'Eurochemic a commencé avec les informations venant des pays qui les possédaient alors, spécialement les Etats-Unis, mais aussi la France, et je crois qu'Eurochemic a d'abord facilité la diffusion de ces connais­ sances. Elle l'a rendue plus rapide et a permis qu'elle se fasse de façon plus lar­ ge, car les équipes d'Eurochemic ont été constituées par des ingénieurs qui avaient pour la plupart déjà travaillé dans le domaine du retraitement et qui ont gardé des contacts avec les ingénieurs continuant à travailler dans leurs pays d'origine.

Un deuxième domaine que la nature internationale d'Eurochemic a permis à avoir des résultats importants a été la confrontation d'expériences au cours de nom­ breuses réunions, d'échanges fréquents entre équipes de différents pays. Cela a dépassé de beaucoup le cadre de journées d'information ou de séminaires. La réali­ sation des installations a entraîné un grand nombre de réunions. Leur mise en mar­ che a entraîné un nombre considérable de visites de spécialistes des pays membres. 197

Enfin, certains thèmes de recherche et de développement effectués par Eurochemic ne l'auraient probablement pas été au niveau national. Par exemple, dans le do­ maine des déchets: certains travaux de recherche et de développement ne peuvent être faits que si l'on dispose de déchets et que l'on y soit amené par la nécessité de satisfaire à des objectifs impératifs.

A. Conclusion

L'acquis d'Eurochemic est donc indéniable et le plus important est peut-être d'avoir montré qu'une telle réalisation a été possible. Eurochemic a joué un rôle incontes­ table dans la coopération dans le domaine du retraitement et des déchets. Les équipes créées à Eurochemic ont essaimé dans leurs pays d'origine, mais les con­ tacts subsistent et la coopération continue.

Est-ce que nous avons fait tout ce que nous pouvions faire ? Est-ce que nous pou­ vons encore faire quelque chose, alors que nous en sommes à la fin de la vie d'Eurochemic. Et à la fin de sa vie, on veut laisser un testament, surtout r,uand on est dans une famille, et Eurochemic a je crois vraiment constitué une famille, comme la réunion d'hier et d'aujourd'hui l'a bien montré. Mais faire un testament veut dire que l'on a quelque chose à laisser derrière soi. C'est indéniablement le cas pour Eurochemic et tous ceux qui y ont collaboré peuvent en être fiers.

Est-il suffisant de laisser plus de 300 rapports qui vont plus ou moins moisir dans des bibliothèques ? Je crois qj'il faut que nous fassions plus. Je crois qu'il faut que nous fassions un certain nombre de rapports de synthèse, qui permettraient de condenser tout ce que nous avons acquis ensemble, tous les domaines dans lesquels nous avons pu progresser et de les faire d'une façon qu'ils soient utilisables par nos successeurs.

3ien sûr, l'énergie nucléaire a pris du retard; le retraitement a aussi pris du re­ tard, mais nous voyons qu'un certain nombre d'usines sont en cours de construc­ tion ou vont être construites dans les années qui viennent, fit je suis persuadé qy- l'expérience d'Eurochemic pourra apporter beaucoup à ces usines, h condition qu'il reste quelque chose d'utilisable, et c'est là que je cro's qu'il nous reste 0 faire. Nous aurons à ce moment-là complètement rempli notre tâche, et nous pourrons gar­ der un peu cet esprit d'Eurochemic.

199

IMPRESSIONS OF A SENIOR MEMBER OF THE BOARD

Sven G. Terjesen

As a member of the Eurochemic 3oard and of the Technical Committee from the very beginning, I am glad to have a few minutes of your precious time, although I be­ lieve that what is worth saying has been said already, at least once.

In some way, I feel that I am also representing the financial contributors to Euro­ chemic, the countries providing the cash, after all not quite unimportant in the Eurochemic performance.

During the 25 years since the Eurochemic Convention and Statutes were signed, some subtle changes have taken place in the workings of the Board and of the Technical Committee. In the early days, a number of important and difficult decisions had to be made. As the Eurochemic organization had not been fully established, or at least had not been run in, these issues were actively discussed in the Board and in the Technical Committee, and the members were able to make real contributions to the solutions chosen.

This gradually changed. The solutions to most technical and organizational problems were provided by the Management, backed by a competent staff, as it should bo in a modern high-technology organization. All that was left was to say yes, and hardly ever no. However, the important function of asking all sorts of pertinent questions remained, thus providing an incentive for the Management to put forward well thought out proposals with no loose ends, which would inevitably be picked up and pulled at.

Technically Eurochemic developed very satisfactorily, and the Board had to concen­ trate on the many intractably commercial and political problems. We have already heard how the early enthousiasm for atomic energy declined, and how the estimate of the amount of spent fuel repeatedly had to be revised downward in the face of strong competition. The share capital was lost, and Eurochemic changed from a pre­ sumptive profitable company into a project relying on yearly contributions from the member countries.

The history of Eurochernic as a commmerrial enterprise is not a happy one. It is therefore all the more satisfying to underline again Ire technical achievement- 200

which have been first class. It is remarkable and gratifying that specialists from so many countries were able to cooperate and coordinate their efforts efficiently. Language and background were different and to complicate matters, the host country had itself two languages, if we don't count the famous Eurochemic brand of En­ glish.

Here in Mol wascreated a technically highly successful plant for the reprocessing of power reactor fuel. Considering the difficulties experienced elsewhere, this is a truly remarkable achievement. This applies to all aspects of the project, from the initial research and development through the testing of flowsheets and critical items of equipment, to the planning of the installation, the erection of the plant, the extensive cold tests, the modifications carried out, and not least the careful operation which successfully avoided all serious contamination.

The same applies to the closing down and the research associated with decontamina­ tion and the safe handling of the radioactive wastes. Eurochemic has convincingly demonstrated that reprocessing of power reactor fuel can be done quite safely, and that such a plant can be closed down, also quite safely.

As a Board member, I would like to thank all members of the staff for their whole­ hearted efforts to make Eurochemic a technical success, and for their willing coope­ ration. That does not mean that I have forgotten the legitimate worry of the staff for their own future, which culminated in the famous locking in of the Board at Mol a number of years ago. Personally I got off lightly, being released on compas­ sionate grounds and driven at breathtaking speed to tne airport for a last minute boarding of my plane for Norway.

As a Board member I felt, and I think most of us did, thaT we had to act in a dual manner. We should act on behalf of our governments, somewhat like puppets on a string. But we should also act as individuals, to further the interests of Eurochemic. It is my impression that the Board worked ;n a fine spirit of coopera­ tion, although it cannot be denied that on occasions interests could clash. The greatest strain was the baffling question of CNEN who managed to pay much less than the others, but still to retain practically all the advantages of full member­ ship, and to have their fuel reprocessed. That was indeed a great feat of diplo­ macy .

I mentioned that some subtle changes had taken place in the workings of the Board. In some respects, the Board functioned like a meeting of the leading politi­ cians viewed through an inverted telescope. I remember one telling episode from the days of Dr. Adenauer, with his policy of always agreeing with the French. At one of our meetings, hero was a proposal which I , as a man from industry, did 201

not agree with, and I said so. I got no support. But after the meeting, Dr. Götte from Farbwerke Hrechst told me that he had wanted to back me up, but did not feel free to do so. That situation has indeed changed.

To conclude, I think that Eurochemic has been well worth the money and the effort, particularly by demonstrating that international cooperation is possible, even in this troubled world of ours.

203

EUROCHEMIC: A CHALLENGE OR A LOST OPPORTUNITY ?

W. Heinz and R.P. Randl

We've learned in these two days what Eurochemic experience has meant in reality and that it still can be used, if one is prepared to do so. Being nearly at the end ov this seminar, I hope you are not too tired to follow me on another topic, which fits I think to the last lecture, and in my opinion is the most important one, given by Mr. Frerotte: About the future of Eurochemic.

It was proposed to me by the Committee of this meeting to speak about the experi­ ence in analytical control of the chemical process and especially in the field of safeguards. However, looking on the titles of the other lectures, we found one miss­ ing about the development of the situation of Eurochemic during its lifetime and an analysis of all the judgements, interpretations and decisions which finally led to the apparent end of the Company.

As I served the Company in very different positions, I felt myself like an observer and from this function I chose the following topic for my lecture, to which my co-author, Mr. Randl, contributed the delicate political part. So after this short introduction, let us have a small look behind the curtain of this tragicomedy which I thinx Eurochemic is: A Challenge or a Lost Opportunity ?

After the first Geneva conference on the peaceful uses of nuclear energy, there was big enthousiasm in Europe for the new technology of energy production by fission. It was also soon noticed that developing reactor systems could only partly make use of the advantages of nuclear fission. This energy production proved to be es­ sentially attractive if one recovered and recycled the remaining or newly generated fission materials.

At this point in time, the necessary techniques for the reprocessing of spent fuel was only well known in countries with a nuclear weapons production. It was not fully available to other countries.

Since all non-nuclear weapons states in Europe, wanting to use nuclear energy for peaceful uses, were not in a situation to design, build and operate a reprocessing plant alone, thirteen countries of the OECD decided to form a joint company to get this technology in hand. 204

Knowing what we know now, with all the experience we have gained in the last decades, we should admire the courage with which this unique project has been realized, for although the US helped with sending technically experienced consul­ tants, it has been a sort of adventure, especially if we think of the little knowhow then available to the staff.

In Europe there was indeed only one company, the architect-engineer for the CEA, Saint-Gobain, which could employ the necessary knowhow and which corsequently was selected to lead all the companies working at the project. The management and the staff of Eurochemic did indeed need courage to fulfil their task, because for many of the people this technology was also "terra incognita". Only a few among them could present the required practical knowhow.

Taking into account that the team included twelve, iater thirteen nationalities, one has to pay one's respect to the management, especially to Mr. Rometsch and Mr. Barendregt, who succeeded in forming a team which could handle the problem. One of the proofs of their success can be seen on the site, in concrete and steel. Another proof is the big audience of this seminar, where the team spirit of Euro­ chemic people is still alive.

As enthousiasm ana optimism reigned in all areas of the Company, the crew was able to solve all of the manyfold administrative and technical problems and to build a plant which even after twenty five years is still outstanding in many parts and which was functioning from the beginning.

Originally, the plant was built to reprocess normal power reactor fuels. The deci­ sion to reprocess also MTR fuels in the same installations, without having a fully adequate engineering outset, created some operational difficulties, resulting in a limited time availability. But in fact, the main aim of the Company was to con­ struct an industrial size reprocessing plant, while Eurochemic as a pilot should deliver all the required data and operational experience for it.

All those who fought for this goal in the sixties were considered to be lacking the sense of reality completely. But why did we totally miss that aim ? Why even close the pilot plant, which was operating so successfully, but the aims of which were absolutely not reached yet at the time of the shutdown ?

What was it really which led to the closing down of Eurochemic's reprocessing faci­ lity ? Technology certainly not. It should be admitted today that the decision to close down came at the end of a chain of misunderstandings, wrong judgements and decisions, partly from Eurochemic people, partly ' r jm representatives of the share­ holders, the member countries of Eurochemic. 205

Let's try to persue the developments which led to the closing down. I guess that one of the reasons was the offer to use the large reprocessing capacities previously only used for military purposes in France and Great Britain also for commercial purposes, i.e. the reprocessing of power reactor fuels. As a result, an extreme competition on the market, even a fight for spent fuel elements was started, a fight which never could be won by Eurochemic, because of its size, or better smallness. And it was even worse, because this policy also changed the main goal of Euro­ chemic.

As a result of this policy, the members of the Board wanted to get a financial re­ lief for their respective governments, since commercial activities are bound to bring a profit to the entrepreneur. But they ignored somewhat the consequences, which inevitably occurred. Eurochemic lost its status of a research and development faci­ lity, and its success was now only measured in relation to its commercial success, which could only be negative in these circumstances.

The climate in the Company also changed and prepared the ground for the later negative decisions. It is quite clear that everybody working in research and de­ velopment accepts that these activities are subsidized and understands this finan­ cing in terms of a possible later commercial use. But if a company develops losses due to its commercial activities, the shareholders change their mind. The fact that these losses are still connected with technological development costs is not taken into account anymore. And the shareholders are no longer willing to carry the fi­ nancial burden.

Soon after the startup of the plant, there were rumors that one of the main share­ holders wanted to leave the Company, because he was no longer interested in the results produced by the Eurochemic plant. Certainly, that were only rumors, but they also changed the climate within the Company. In addition, the GWK was fojnded in the Federal Republic of Germany, to plan and build the WAK. Another main shareholder seemingly had lost his interest. By the way, this decision can only be understood in the light of the situation of these years. This fear of a re­ treat of the most important shareholders made the continuation of the Eurochemic Company extremely difficult. Logically, the Federal Republic of Germany, highly industrialized as it is, wanted to become independent and gain its knowhow in this technology on its own.

Thus it is clear that at this point in time three major countries in Europe were going their own way to the reprocessing technology, or were at least planning to do so. And two of them were the main shareholders of Eurochemic.

The German shareholders, represented by the Ministry for Research and Technology, 206

decided already in the beginning of the seventies, that the reprocessing business was an industrial task. Hence, the KEWA Company was founded in 1971 with the aim to build an industrial size plant on a national basis. That was another step away from the idea of a joint industrial plant in Mol.

In the meantime, the industries of France, the United Kingdom and Germany had contacted each other in order to reach a concerted planning of the required capaci­ ties and to avoid some ruinous competition in Europe. It was expected these days, somewhat triggered by numerous studies of "expert" peop!«, that the reprocessing capacities would be extremely out of proportion in the coming years. It could even be described as a disastrous future for the existing reprocessing capacities within the second half of the seventies.

Today we know that these studies were not worth the paper they were written on, because all these "expert" opinions were soon overruled by the facts. Instead of the above mentioned overcapacities, a very large capacity gap developed. And the latter not only existed on paper, as the former studies, but were reality, and will be reality for quite a time in the future.

Today, the construction of a joint international reprocessing plant in the sixties at Mol can definitely not be called an unrealistic venture anymore. But these and other facts, which should not be mentioned, led to the decision of closing down the Eurochemic plant in the beginning of the seventies and seemed to end all reprocess­ ing at Mol.

The arguments against the shutdown, coming from the staff of Eurochemic, were, and that is somewhat normal, determined by their own wishes. The main share­ holders carried more industrial arguments and were not willing to change their po­ litical decision in order to increase the life and operating time of a non-profitable plant. Even the fact that the reprocessing of oxide instead of metallic fuels was not well known, which later reduced the so-called capacities from the former milita­ ry reprocessing plants, was plainly underestimated or not accepted because of poli­ tical reasons.

All efforts of the Management to defer the decision remained unsuccessful. So what should happen happened indeed. The result is known, and so are the consequences. And there I just wanted to speak about the situation from the standpoint of my own country. The consequences are a delay In availability of reprocessing capacity for about fifteen years. We are largely dependent on other countries and the hoped for lessening of the financial burden remained a "chimera".

On the contrary. The burden has increased and there is no hope for an end of this 207

development, whoever has to bear the costs. The "chance" Eurochemic seemed to have been gambled away once and forever without necessity. It could have been rewon by the planning of a 800 to 1,000 t capacity plant going into operation some­ where at the end of the seventies, and it is clear that the staff could have re­ alized such a plant. The proper planning and operation of such a joint industrial plant would have guaranteed to the shareholders a much better situation in the field of reprocessing than what they have now.

The shutdown of the facility was decided faster than the solution of the problems connected and coming along with it. The conditioning of radioactive wastes as a consequence of the shutdown was not at all clear at this point in time. New pro­ cesses had to be developed, new facilities for these purposes had to be planned, built and operated.

But once again Eurochemic had a goal and was pioneering. Research in the area of waste conditioning was done at many places, but here in ivlol the installations were realized onsite, or are under construction. The slipping time schedules, partly due to these activities, also changed the attitude of the member countries towards Eurochemic, especially that of the host country. It was realized that Belgium is one of the few countries having a completely closed fuel cycle on its territory. Con­ sequently, the idea of a complete decommissioning of the plant then weakened and turned to the opposite, namely to the plan of modernizing the plant and reactiva­ ting it. The political decision to give a chance to such a reanimation was taken this March.

So I feel that all the friends of Eurochemic, all the former collaborators and all the people still occupied in the plant are hoping for the resurrection. The formerly "lost chance" of this plant and the experience gained in this facility would be re­ vitalized and the knowhow gained during all the years could be preserved.

209

L'AVENIR DU RETRAITEMENT EN BELGIQUE

Marcel Frerotte

Tenter de définir les perspectives d'avenir du retraitement, nous astreint, para­ doxalement peut-être, à nous tourner d'abord vers le passé.

La décision prise le 5 mai 1983 par le Comité Ministériel de Coordination Economique et Sociale (belge), donnant, en principe, l'autorisation de redémarrage de l'usine de Dessel, n'a été prise que cinq ans après la signature de la Convention du 24 juillet 1978 conclue entre le Gouvernement belge et Eurochemic, Convention im­ pliquant la reprise des installations en vue de leur remise en exploitation et préci­ sant aussi les obligations et droits respectifs des parties en présence.

Plus de dix annnées de tergiversations et d'hésitations s'écoulent donc après la décision du Conseil d'Eurochemic de mettre fin aux opérations de retraitement à Eurochemic, avant d'en arriver, grâce à la volonté du Gouvernement actuel et au dynamisme de Monsieur Knoops, Secrétaire d'Etat à l'cnergie, déterminés à mener à bonne fin un débat parlementaire attendu depuis longtemps sur la politique éner­ gétique, à une ouverture prometteuse sur l'avenir du retraitement en Belgique.

A titre i I lustrât if, le CMCES a délibéré, à huit reprises, sur des projets de déci­ sions, allant dans des sens très différents, entre 1973 et 1978, avant d'opter fina­ lement, le 13 juillet 1978, en faveur de la Convention citée supra, qui était la pre­ mière étape indispensable à la remise en activité des installations de retraitement d'Eurochemic et qui permettait de transférer ces installations, dans certaines condi­ tions, à une société à constituer selon des modalités à arrêter entre le Gouverne­ ment belge et les actionnaires de ladite société ou, à défaut de cette société, au Gouvernement belge.

Parmi ces huit décisions ministérielles, restées dans la plupart des cas sans suite opérationnelle, l'une mérite cependant une attention spéciale: celle du 19 septembre 1974 autorisant le Ministre des Affaires Economiques à créer un syndicat d'étude "Belgoprocess", composé de 50% de représentants de l'Etat et 50% de représentants du secteur privé (électricité - 5ynatom), et à ouvrir des négociations avec Euro­ chemic sur le concept d'une participation belge majoritaire à une nouvelle société de retraitement exploitant les installations d'Eurochemic. Rappelons l'importance du rôle du syndicat Belgoprocess, lequel a procédé aux premières études de moder­ nisation des installations d'Eurochemic et d'estimation du coût entraîné par la re- 210

mise en état de celles-ci. C'est au sein de ce même syndicat qu'ont été traités les problèmes de stand-by et de personnel, posés par les délais à la décision effective de redémarrage des installations, ainsi que le suivi du développement du projet AVB (atelier de vitrification belge). Le coût pour l'Etat belge de ces activités au travers de 3elgoprocess dépasse 600 millions de francs belges à la fin de l'année dernière.

La deuxième étape dans la phase de décision de reprise du retraitement se trouve dans la loi budgétaire du 8 août 1980, qui autorise l'Etat à prendre une partici­ pation dans une société mixte ayant pour objet de gérer les activités du cycle du combustible (à l'exception de la gestion des déchets radioactifs); toutefois, cette loi soumettrait à autorisation de principe des Chambres législatives toute reprise d'activités de retraitement en Belgique.

Ce débat a eu lieu au Parlement en 1982 et s'est terminé en mars 1983. I! en res­ sort que la Belgique do.'t valoriser les investissements qui ont été faits sur le sol national dans le domaine du retraitement. La Chambre s'est prononcée en faveur du redémarrage de l'usine de retraitement Eurochemic, en respectant les normes de rejet existantes, ce qui signifie que l'on pourrait envisager l'aménagement d'une capacité de traitement annuelle de 120 tonnes.

Quant à la recommandation du Sénat, elle a ajouté que la remise en service devait avoir pour but de diversifier les activités de l'usine par le retraitement de com­ bustibles spéciaux pour le compte de tiers, ainsi que d'accroître la capacité de production pour les combustibles standard aux prix pratiqués par les grandes usines.

Enfin, le Sénat précise que les produits issus du retraitement doivent être condi­ tionnés et stockés dans les conditions offrant toutes garanties de sécurité et de survei I lance.

Ces recommandations déterminent les conditions générales de réalisation du projet de remise en service de l'usine, projet qui relève de la responsabilité de la nou­ velle société, dont l'assemblée générale constitutive s'est tenue le 18 avril. Il s'agit de la Société mixte Synatom à participation pouvoirs publics - secteur privé.

Dès avant la prise de participation officielle des pouvoirs publics dans la société Synatom, des contacts avaient été pris en vue cle constituer un syndicat d'étude, destiné à remplacer Belgoprocess, avec DWK et Cogéma. L'actionnaire privé ce Syr.- atom estimait, en effet, indispensable de mettre à jour les études effectuées ps- Belgoprocess, notamment en fonction des résultats de l'actualisation de !'analyse de sécurité à conduire avec les Autorités belges compétentes, préalableme'.t h l'éva­ luation précise du coût des investissements à réaliser. 211

| Société Nationale SYNATOM ONDRAF | d'Investissements I

Actionnaires: Organisme National les 3 compagnies pour les Déchets d'électricité les Radioactifs et les plus importantes Matières Fissiles en Belgique

50% 50%

28.04.1983 I 1 I Société Belge | | des Combustibles | | Nucléaires | SYNATOM I

20/27.05.1983 SYBELPRO

Syndicat d'études (60% Synatom; 20% DWK; 20% Cogéma)

PROJET

AVIS DE LA COMMISSION SPECIALE

RECOMMENDATION

+ mars 1984 DECISION DU CONSEIL D'ADMINISTRATION DE SYNAÎOM

DECISION DU GOUVERNEMENT BELGE

positive negative

Constitution de Reprise par BELGOPROCESS ONDRAF (filiale de Synatom) 51% Synatom 49% actionnaires étrangers 212

Ce syndicat, dont la création a été enregistrée en mai dernier, porte le nom de Sybelpro; il est donc composé de trois participants qui se répartissent la charge du financement de l'étude d'actualisation (60% pour Synatom, 20% pour chacun des deux autres participants). Si, à l'issue de cette étude, dont la durée prévue est d'une dizaine de mois, il est décidé de procéder à la réalisation des investisse­ ments nécessaires au redémarrage de l'usine, une filiale de la société mixte Syna­ tom sera créée pour le retraitement.

Dans cette filiale, la part belge- sera au minimum 51%, le solde reste attribuable à des participants étrangers, avec offre prioritaire aux membres du syndicat Sybel­ pro.

C'est donc dans le courant du premier semestre de 1984, sur base d'un devis d'en­ gagement définitif, que sera prise par Synatom la décision d'engager les investisse­ ments via une société filiale qui serait donc créée d'abord pour procéder aux in­ vestissements et ensuite pour exploiter l'installation et dans laquelle les parte­ naires étrangers seront invités à participer. In fine, c'est cette filiale spécialisée en matière de retraitement qui jouera le rôle de la nouvelle société aux termes de la Convention Etat belge-Eurochemic 1978.

Dans l'état actuel de la connaissance du dossier, il est prévu que les travaux d'investissements s'étaleront sur six ans et porteront sur un montant (y compris les frais de pré-exploitation) de 15,5 milliards de francs belges (1982). Il est pré­ vu que le financement de ce montant soit assuré en totalité par les clients de l'usine de retraitement.

A cet effet, des clauses contractuelles, similaires à celles figurant aux contrats de retraitement passés avec Cogéma, sont envisagées (notamment la couverture des investissements par pré-financement).

Quant au problème du personnel, l'article 23 de la Convention de 1978 prescrit que la nouvelle société reprendra, en fonction de ses besoins, les membres du personnel d'Eurochemic qui possèdent les qualifications correspondant aux emplois à pourvoir. On peut donc affirmer que la quasi totalité du personnel occupé contractuellement à Eurochemic sera reprise par la nouvelle société, dans l'hypothèse de la décision définitive de retraiter le combustible en Belgique et qu'à moyen terme les effectifs pourraient être doublés.

Ajoutons que, dans l'éventualité d'une conclusion négative à l'issue de l'étude ce Sybelpro, le Gouvernement belge s'est engagé à reprendre 160 personnes au rr.'.r. '. ,~,u.-.-. dans le contexte d'un protocole conclu en 1981. 213

Mais nous n'avons pas à examiner cette éventualité dans le contexte de notre expo­ sé et nous ne voulons pas croire que ce problème puisse se poser; si toutefois la solution du retraitement devait être abandonnée, la reprise des installations se fe­ rait par I'ONDRAF.

Mais je pense que je puis vous donner la garantie que nous ferons tout du côté du pouvoir public, le ministère de l'Energie, pour qu'on ne doit pas en venir à cette solution. CLOSING

Etienne Knoops Belgian State Secretary for Energy Emi le DetiI Ieux Manager of Eurochemic

Lars-rtke Nöjd Chairman of Eurochemic's Board of Liquidators Deputy managing director, Studsvik Energiteknik AB, Nyköping, Sweden 215

CONCLUSIVE REMARKS

E. Knoops

As Mr. E. Knoops, Belgian State Secretary for Energy, could not attend the meeting, his conclusive remarks were read by his principal private secretary, Mr. L. Bolle.

Effectivement, ayant pu répondre positivement, ayant souhaité être parmi vous aujourd'hui, le ministre Knoops s'en est vu empêché, et je vous prie de l'excuser. Un ministre propose et le Parlement dispose. C'est ainsi que d'importants travaux budgétaires dans la commission de la Chambre cette après-midi requéraient la pré­ sence du ministre qui a tenu à ce que néanmoins en son absence je vous fasse le message qu'il avait préparé à votre intention.

A l'issue de ce séminaire consacré à 1 'expérience unique que la société internatio­ nale Eurochemic a accumulée au cours de ses vingt-cinq années d'existence, il est indispensable que les personnes préserves ici sachent l'admiration en laquelle tient le ministre Knoops tous les membres de cette société, pour leur ténacité, pour leur détermination et l'efficacité dont ils ont fait preuve au long de nombreuses années parsemées à la fois d'événements heureux et malheureux.

Si votre expérience peut être considérée comme unique, c'est parce que vous avez toujours été des précurseurs, que ce soit par les types de combustibles retraités, par certaines particularités technologiques de votre procédé, ou enfin par cette ex­ périence de la décontamination des installations que vous êtes les seuls au monde à posséder. Cette expérience d'ailleurs fait incontestablement référence en la ma­ tière, tout en suscitant l'admiration bien au-delà de nos petites frontières.

Vous savez, et M. Frerotte l'a rappelé il y a quelques minutes, que nous comptons valoriser cette expérience, et la prolonger par le redémarrage des installations. Cette décision sera définitivement prise d'ici un an, après une dernière évaluation technico-économique dont on vous a parlé. Lors de cette évalution technico-écono- mique il est bien entendu que selon le veux du Sénat les critères de sécurité et leurs conséquences seront envisagés.

C'est une attitude logique et sage, cette phase intermédiaire d'évaluation et d'étude approfondie. C'est une attitude sage et logique que je dois comprendre des 216

investisseurs lucides que sont d'une part les producteurs d'électricité et d'autre part l'Etat belge avec l'aide des partenaires étrangers qui participent à cette évaluation.

De beslissing om de installaties opnieuw in bedrijf te nemen werd langdurig bespro­ ken in het Parlement, dat deze heropening trouwens aanbevolen heeft met het oog op een samenhangend nationaal beleid inzake: rationeel energieverbruik; bevoorra­ dingszekerheid en vermindering van de afhankelijkheid van petroleum; verlaging van de energieprijzen en van de electriciteitsprijzen in het bijzonder en eerbied voor de bescherming van de mens en van het leefmilieu.

Er dient namelijk aan gedacht dat de opwerking van splijtstoffen bijdraagt tot de verwezenlijking van die vier doelstellingen door de terugwinning van uranium en plutonium en het later opnieuw gebruiken ervan in de kerncentrales. Maar het op­ nieuw in bedrijf nemen staat ook in het teken van de internationale samenwerking, want elk van de landen die samen met ons dezelfde weg opgaan - ik denk hier meer bepaald aan Frankrijk er, Duitsland - heeft er belang bij de kostprijs van deze operatie te optimalizeren en zich dus te specializeren in de brandstoffenkeuze. Dat is ook een van de doelstellingen van het. vernieuwde bedrijf.

Belgium was recently designated by the IEA (International Energy Agency, Paris) as one of the most nuclear orientated countries with an exemplary nuclear power plant construction programme. As for the IAEA in Vienna, its Board of Governors has just singled out Belgium as one of the nine most advanced countries in the world as far as nuclear power is concerned. It is clear that the reprocessing capa­ city developed on our territory by Eurochemic, which enabled the looping of the fuel cycle, greatly helped in creating this worldwide image.

Therefore, I would like to address my last words of thanks to all those involved in Eurochemic, namely the Board of Liquidators, the Technical Committee, the Mana­ gement and the Staff, Belgium is grateful to you for your conscientious approach toward work over the long hard years which made it possible to keep the facilities in perfect working order and your great patience which enabled Belgium finally to arrive at positive decisions. So, be assured that I will do my utmost to success­ fully finalize this business in the coming year, firstly at national and internal level, and secondly within the framework of the final négociation due to take place in the coming months with your company.

L'époque mai-juin est l'époque privilégiée des rencontres du ministre Knoops avec le monde du retraitement : quelques discours, quelques exposés faits l'année passée qui ont fait quelque bruit, vous vous en souvenez peut-être; une visite ici même en mai 1982; la décision gouvernementale aussi, à laquelle M. Frerotte a fait allu­ sion; I

que le ministre a fait à La Hague, il y a quelques jours. Ce sont quelques étapes du passé. C'est la fin du printemps, et ce qui compte c'est la fin du printemps 198k, soit l'aboutissement heureux d'un long processus de décisions et surtout l'aube de nouvelles et nombreuses années de vie opérationelle pour les installations de Dessel dans l'intérêt de tous. Je crois qu 'il faut souligner que cet intérêt se situe au niveau international, national et régional.

219

ADDRESS OF THANKS

E. Deti lieux

Arriving at the end of this seminar, I would like to address a number of thanks in the name of the Organizing Committee.

First of all, our warmest thanks go to all our speakers and chairmen, who h:tv told us of the many aspects of Eurochemic's achievements. For many of us, those papers and discussions have been an opportunity to refresh our memories, not onlv of the exciting experience of international life and cooperation, but also of our professional lives.

I have also to express the gratitude of the Organizing Committee to the Managcm' "' of the Euratom Central Bureau for Nuclear Measurements, who offered us their cu< lities for the seminar.

I also thank all those who have taken an active part in the preparation of this conference: the members of the Organizing Committee, especially Mr. Willem Drent. his co-workers, the ladies at the desks, who have prepared this seminar in somr- times difficult circumstances.

And of course, we sîiould not close this seminar without expressing our thanks and my thanks to all the Eurochemic personnel, former and present, because all of them, on every level of the hierarchy, made it possible to achieve the experience we have reviewed during those four sessions, and I wish you all to know how much the spirit of this Eurochemic personnel, especially since the shutdown, has helped the Management and all the deciding bodies to take the decisions we have reached just now. In the name of the Board and the Management, my warmest thanks go to all the personnel.

My gratitude and the thanks of the whole Eurochemic community extend tu Mr. Knoops, as well as his collaborators in his office and his administration who, in the last two years, have made extensive efforts to reach this decision.

I appreciate the help we got from various Belgian circles and all the governing bodies of Eurochemic: the Board of Directors, now Board of Liquidators, the Tech­ nical Committee, and especially from our present chairman of the Board of Liquida- 220

tors, Mr. Nöjd, as well as his predecessor, Dr. Schmidt-Kiister, who initiated the Convention of 1978 which helped the Company to continue to live during the lr:<* years.

I should like to extend our thanks to Mr. Sousselier as well, who since the her in­ ning of the Company is chairman of the Technical Committee.

Now, before passing the word to our chairman of the Board to close this seminar, I would like to show you the Eurochemic site you know and the same site annci':»:; to the concept we have today, the site as it will look after the decision to st;t>r up again, with the new facilities (see picture to the right): the new head-end, tin- new storage for vitrified products, a new tail-end... And of course, tomorrow yv.i are all invited to visit the existing facilities. 221

EUROCHEMIC'S SITE NOW AND (MAYBE) IN THE FUTURE

st ing installations Process bui I ding Fuel recept ion and storage Analytical Laboratory Vent t tat ion HLLW storage F in^l product storage Liquid chemicals storage LLLW treatment General serv ices I ndustrial development lab Water treatment EBES substation Store Sedimentat ion sump Wells 200 m3 vessel Stack MLW storage Extension B. b I nterim storage sol id waste Extension B. 2\ Interim storage solid aste Bi tumi n iza' ion Storage b i tumi m zed waste

New installations 1B Extension process building for extraction 28, Extension fuel recept ion and storage 4B, Extension ventilation SB, Extension LLLW treatment 9B Extension general serv ices 27B. Storage bituminized waste 28. AVB 29, Storage conditioned LEWC f 30. Storage HLLW 31. Pamela 32. Storage conditioned HLW : 33. Mead-end 34. Pu recovery Û 1 35. Ventilation, technical area j •

L t • L

17 n

\_ ox018 018 I»1» |

CANAL ESCAUT-MEUSE 223

CLOSING REMARKS

L.A. Nöjd

As members of the Board of Liquidators (in fact a name none of us likes too much - it sounds like something as the "Daughters of the French Revolution"), we must recognize the importance of the fact that we are, legally, a company, and one of the consequences thereof is that we have to observe the formal procedures which follow Belgian law for private companies, one of the reasons that we have to go through the stage of liquidation.

As regards this period, as well as the earlier, when we named ourselves the Board of Directors, I think that there is a fundamental principle connected with companies which I consider of the utmost importance throughout the world, and that is that the board members are fully responsible for the activities of the company, and I'm happy to inform you that during the last years, all the decisions in the Board have been unanimous. Sometimes perhaps it has been necessary for a particular board member to make a temporary reservation, to check with his authorities or owners about the attitude, but this reservation has been waved in the next meet­ ing.

This did not happen in a body which is some kind of crippled organization, it happened in a body which has been dynamic and vital and as you have noticed, I hope, also concerned with high technology in the last years.

There have been problems, of course, but perhaps I could take the opportunity to add one more law to the collection of Mr. von Busekist, one I like very much: The proof of success is not to solve all the problems, but not to have the same prob­ lems as last year. And if we take that as a measure, J think we had a reasonable success in the workings of Eurochemic.

Now, I would like also to mention that in my mind we are not talking about the funeral or the end of this and that. I think we are talking about the closing of one chapter of international work in the field of nuclear energy, and 1 am quite sure that this chapter will be followed by many others, more interesting even than this one. 224

It is with pride that we close this chapter. I read in the copy of the official let­ ter Mr. Frerotte referred to: "Concerne: Usine de retraitement de Dessel, ex- Eurochemic". And something came to my mind, which in Europe is a medieval tradi­ tion. When there is a change of the head of state, there is the proud proclamation: " The king is dead, long live the king !" And perhaps we shall be so happy next year that we can proclaim in the same way: "Eurochemic is dead, long live the Belgian reprocessing company in Dessel !"

With this, ladies and gentlemen, it is my privilege to declare that the 1983 Seminar on Eurochemic Experience is over. LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

\lder, B. Eidg. Institut für Reaktorforsrhung (EIR), WürenIingen, Switzerland. Alderhout, J. Eurochemic, Mol, Belgium. Amaury, P. Sofratome, Puteaux, France. Andriessen, H. GfK, Pro.jekt W i ederauf arbe i tung und Abf a I I behand I ung, Karlsruhe, Germany (FR). Asyee, J. Urenco Ltd., Marlow, England.

Baetslé, L. SCK/CEN, Chemistry Department, Mol, Belgium. Bardone, G. ENEA, Rome, Italy. Barendregt, T. Nuclebras, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Bastrup-Birk, E, Danish Energy Agency, Copenhagen, Denmark. Batchelor, R. CBNM, Geel, Belgium. Beets, C. SCK/CEN, Safeguards Department, Mol, Fe 19111m. Be I ot, F . UEEB, Brussels, Belgium. Benfenat i, I . ENEA, Rome, Italy. Beone, G. ENEA, Rome, Italy. Berg, R. WiederaufarbeitungsanI age Karlsruhe (WAK), Germany (FR). Berners, 0. Quadrex International, Mannheim, Germany (FR). BokeIund, H. European Transuranium Institute, Karlsruhe, Germany (FR). Bo Ile, L . State Secretariat for Energy, Brussels, Belgium. Bouzou, G. CEA, CEN de la Vallée du Rhône, Bagno Is-sur-Cèze, France. Br i and, A. SGN, St . -Quentin-en-YveI ines, France. Broothaerts, J. SCK/CEN, Chemistry Department, Mol, Belgium.

Cadrot, Jacomex, Paris, France.

CàO, S. ENEA, Fuel Cycle Department, Rome, Italy. Carreira-Pich, J, Ministry of Industry and Technology, Lisbon, Portuga I . Cayron, R. Be IgonucIéaire, Brussels, Belgium. Charon, S. SGN, St . -Quentin-en-YveI ines, France. Chr i standeI, H. Bundesministerium von Inncrn, Bonn, Germany (FR) Codée, H.C.K. Ministerie voor Volkshuisvesting, Ruimtelijke Ordening en Milieubeheer, The Hague, Netherlands, Coo Is, J. Euroc hemic, Mol, Belgium.

Danguy, J. Synatom, Brussels, Belgium. Débauche, M. Be IgonucIéaire, Brussels, Belgium. De PeukeIaer, M. Be IgonucIéaire, Brussels, Belgium. De Ro i t se I i er , IJ. Comprime Belgium, Antwerp, Belgium. Pehon, C. BeIgonucléaire, Brussels, Belgium. Dejonghe, P. SCK/CEN, Associate general manager. Mol, Belgium. Demon ie, M. Eurochemic, Mol, Belgium. De Pauw, EBES, Antwerp, Belgium. Det iI I eux, E. Eurochemic, Mol, Belgium. Det iIIeux, M. Mo I, Be I g iurn. De Wande I eer, J. Be Igonucléaire, Brussels, Belgium. De WiIde, G. Comprimo Belgium, Antwerp, Belgium. Dobbel s, F. Eurochemic, Mol, Belgium. Drent, W. Eurochemic, Mol, Belgium.

Eschrich, H. Eurochemic, Mol, Belgium. Ewest, E. DWK, Pamela Site, Mol, Belgium.

Ferrari, P. Eurochemic, Mol, Belgium. Fischer, P. Comprimo Belgium, Hannover, Germany (FR). Franke, A. UHDE, Dortmund, Germany (FR). Franssen, F. SCK/CEN, Safeguards Department, Mol, Belgium. Frerotte, M. Energy Administration, Brussels, Belgium.

Geens, L . Eurochemic, Mol, Belgium. Goossens, W. SCK/CEN, Chemistry Department, Mol, Belgium. Grolade, R. USSI , Bagneux, France. Gubernator, K. CBNM, Geel, Belgium. Guntensberger, M. Eidg. Institut für Reaktorforschung (EIR), Würenlingen, Switzerland. Gustafsson, B. Swedish Nuclear Fuel Supply Co., Stockholm, Sweden,

Hackste in, K. NUKEM, Hanau, Germany (FR). Haeck, W. Comprimo Belgium, Antwerp, Belgium. Hal I, A. EUREX, Saluggia, Italy. Hannestad, G. Institute for Energy Technology, Kjeller, Norway. He imerI, W. DWK, Pamela Site, Mol, Belgium. Heinz, W. Wiederaufarbeitungsanlage Karlsruhe (WAK), Germany (FR). Henn, K. Wicderaufarbeitungsanlage Karlsruhe (WAK), Germany (FR). Herbrechter, D. Kraftanlagen AG, Heidelberg, Germany (FR). Hi Id, W. Eurochemic, Mol, Belgium. Huberland, M. FBFC, DesseI, Belgium. Huet, P. Counsel of State, Paris, France. Humblet, L. Eurochemic, Mol, Belgium. Hunzinger, W. Motor Columbus Consulting Engineers, Baden, Switzerland. Mardi, S. EUREX, Saluggia, Italy. Ishibashi, Y. Power Reactor and Nuclear Fuel Development Corp. (PNC), Tokyo, Japan. Issel, W. DWK, Hannover, Germany (FR).

Jacobsen, C. Risd National Laboratory, Roski I de, Denmark. Jahns, A. Gesel Ischaft fur Reaktorsicherhe11, Cologne, Germany (FR). Joncklieere, E. Be I gonuc I éa i re, Brussels, Belgium. Joseph, C.J. Urenco, Almelo, Netherlands.

Keese, H. Transnuklear, Hanau, Germany (FR). Klitgaard, J. Skaerbaekvaerket, Fredericia, Denmark. Knickel, K.-H. UHDE, Dortmund, Germany (FR). Knoch, W. KEWA, Hannover, Germany (FR). Koch, G. GfK, Institute for Hot Chemistry, Karlsruhe, Germany (FR). Koschorke, H. WiederaufarbeitungsanI age Karlsruhe (WAK), Germany (FR). Kowa, S. GfK, Pro.jekt W i ederauf arbe i tung und Abf a I I behand I ung, Karlsruhe, Germany (FR). Kraak, W. Energiecentrum Nederland (ECN), Petten, Netherlands. Kroebel, R. GfK, Projekt Wiederaufarbeitung und AbfaiIbehandIung, Karlsruhe, Germany (FR). Kugai, K. Power Reactor and Nuclear Fuel Development Corp. (PNC), Tokyo, Japan.

Lambert, M. Bank Prusse I-Lambert, Mol, Belgium. Lambotte, J.-M. Belgian Ministry for Public Health, Brussels, Belgium. Lateur, P. Socertec, Brussels, Belgium. Lefillatre, G. CEA, CEN de la Vallée du Rhône, Bagno Is-sur-Cèze, France. Levain, J.-C. CEA, CEN de Fontenay-aux-Roses, France. Lipschutz, E. Comprimo Belgium, Antwerp, Belgium. Lung, M. SGN, St.-fluentin-en-YveI ines, France. Lüthi, H.R. Bundesamt fur Fnergiewirtschaft, Bern, Switzerland.

Marchant, Y. Eurochemic, Mol, Belgium. Marcus, F. Nordic Liaison Committee for Atomic Energy, Roski I de, Denmark. Martine! le, 0. Eurochemic, Mol, Belgium. Matsumoto, K. Power Reactor and Nuclear Fuel Development Corp. (PNC), Tokyo, Japan. Meijer, A. DWK, Pamela Site, Mol, Belgium. Meyers, G. Euratom, Luxembourg. Moure «HI, J.-C. Belgian Ministry for Public Health, Brussels, Belgium. Nakashima, T. JGC Corp., Nuclear Project Div., Yokohama, Japan. Nöjd, L.-A. Studsvik Energiteknik AB, Nyköping, Sweden. Chairman of Eurochemic's Board of Liquidators.

Nordgard, T. Has I urn, Norway.

Osipenco, A. Eurochemic, Mol, Belgium.

Penelle, G. Corapro, Mol, Belgium. Pirk, H. NUKEM, Hanau, Germany (FR). Potemans, M. UEEB, Brussels, Belgium.

Randl, R.-P. BMFT, Nuclear Fuel Cycle Section, Bonn, Germany (FR). Reynders, R. Eurochemic, Mol, Belgium. Rolandi, G. ENEA, Fuel Cycle Department, Rome, Italy. Rometsch, R. NAGRA, Baden, Switzerland.

Schmidt-Kiister, W.-J. Energie Consult, Bonn, Germany (FR). Schmieder, H. GfK, Institute for Hot Chemistry, Karlsruhe, Germany (FR). Schmitt, H. UHDE, Dortmund, Germany (FR). Schneider, E. Gesel Ischaft fiir Kernforschung, Karlsruhe, Germany (FR). Scholten, P. Comprimo Belgium, Antwerp, Belgium. Schiiller, W. Gesellschaic zur Wiederaufarbeitung von Kernbrenn- stoffen (GWK), Eggenstein-Leopoldshafen, Germany (FR) Shank, E. Comprimo Belgium, Antwerp, Belgium. Shapar, H.K. NEA, Paris, France. Singer, K. R i s<$ National Laboratory, Roskilde, Denmark. Sousselier, V. CEA, CEN de Fontenay-aux-Roses, France. Chairman of Eurochemic's Technical Committee. Spaepen, G. SCK/CEN, Applied Electrochemistry Department, Mol, Be Ig i urn. Staner, P. BeIgonucléaire, Brussels, Belgium. Sterner, H. Eurochemic, Mol, Belgium. Stritzke, P. DWK, Pamela Site, Mol, Belgium. Strohl, P. NEA, Paris, France. Swennen, R. Eurochemic, Mol, Belgium. Terjesen, S. Norsk Hydro Research Centre, Porsgrunn, Norway, Tischer, H. UHDE, Dortmund, Germany (FR). Tonon, P. State Secretariat for Energy, Brussels, Belgium. Toussaint, B. SGN, St.-Ouentin-en-Yve I ines, France. Van Averbeke, J. BeIgonucIéaire, Brussels, Belgium. Van Caeneghem, J. Euratom, Brussels, Belgium. Vanden Pemden, M.E. BeIgonucIéaire, Hesse I, Belgium. Van den Bossche, A, UHDE, Dortmund, Germany (FR). Van der St i jI, E. Euratom Safeguards, Luxembourg. Van Dongen, A.C. Nucon, Amsterdam, Netherlands. van Gee I , J. Eurochemic, Mol, Belgium. Van He I lemont, G. Be IgonucIéaire, Dessel, Belgium. Verhaeghe, R. EBES, Antwerp, Belgium. Verschuere, Y . Be IgonucIéaire, Brussels, Belgium. V ia lard, E . CEA, CEN de Fontenay-aux-Roses, France. Viefers, W. GeselIschaft für Reaktorsicherheit, Cologne, Germany (FR). Vitulo, A. Comprime Belgium, Antwerp, Belgium. Vokaer, D. State Secretariat for Energy, Brussels, Belgium. von Busekist, 0. Eurochemic, Mol, Belgium.

Wichmann, H.-P. WiederaufarbeitungsanI age Karlsruhe (WAK), Germany (FR). Wiczorek, H. GeselIschaft für Kernforschung, Karlsruhe, Germany (FR).

Ypma, N.J. Nucon, Amsterdam, Netherlands.

Zünd, H, Motor Columbus Consulting Engineers, Baden, Sw i tzerI and. LIST OF AUTHORS

ASYEE, J. 169 Application of Eurochemic Experience at Urenco BARENDREGT, T 37 Construction and Startup of the Reprocessing Plant BERG, R. BOKELUND, H. 95 Process Control and Safeguards Analyses CAO, S. 159 Application of Eurochemic Experience at ENEA DEJONGHE, P. 187 Eurochemic and the Belgian Nuclear Programme DETILLEUX, E. 53 Operation of the Plant and the Period after Shutdown ESCHRICH. H. 67 R&D Achievements at Eurochemic FREROTTE, M. 209 The Future of Reprocessing in Belgium GEENS, L. GUSTAFSSON, B. 83 Eurochemic Plant Operation Experience HEINZ, W. Sc RANDL, R.P. 203 Eurochemic: A Challenge or a Lost Opportunity ? HILD, W. 107 Decontamination, Decommissioning and Waste Management at Eurochemic HUET, P. 1 Eurochemic, origine et principales étapes HUNZINGER, W. 181 What the Staff of a Licensing Authority Could Have Gained From Being Employed by Eurochemic KEESE, H. 173 Spent Fuel Transportation - More Than 20 Years of Experience KLITGAARD, J. 179 Use of Eurochemic Experience in a Conventional Electric Power Stat i on KROEBEL, R. 141 Future Developments for Fuel Reprocessing and Radioactive Waste Management LUNG, M. 147 Influence of Eurochemic Experience on the Japanese and French Reprocessing Plants 0SIPENC0, A. 129 Health and Safety Aspects of Reprocessing at Eurochemic RANDL, R.P. & HEINZ, W. 203 Eurochemic: A Challenge or a Lost Opportunity ? R0METSCH, R. 45 Survey on Research and Development, Safety and Safeguards SCHULLER, W. 163 The Evolution of National Policy in the Federal Republic of Germany on Fuel Cycle and Radwaste Management SHANK, E.M. 29 The United States - Eurochemic Assistance Programme SOUSSELIER, Y. 193 Eurochemic and the International Cooperation in Reprocessing STROHL, P. 9 L'expérience d'Eurochemic en ce qui concerne les aspects institutionnels de la coopération internationale en matière scientifique et technique TERJESEN, S. 199 Impressions of a Senior Member of the Board VAN DER STIJL, E. 103 Safeguards Expedience Gained at Eurochemic VAN GEEL, J. 121 Development Work on Waste Conditioning VON BUSEKIST, 0. 15 Eurochemic and the Law of the Host Country ZUND, H. 183 Application of Experience Gained at Eurochemic in Criticality Control, Shielding and Nuclear Safety