Radioactive Waste Management Programmes in OECD/NEA Member Countries – Overview
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Cov-Eng-Pochette 2005 21/09/05 15:04 Page 1 Australia Radioactive Waste Belgium Canada Management Programmes Czech Republic Finland in OECD/NEA Member France Countries Germany Hungary Italy Japan Korea Mexico Netherlands Norway Slovak Republic Spain Sweden Switzerland United Kingdom United States NUCLEAR•ENERGY•AGENCY 1-OVERVIEW.qxp 16/11/05 17:18 Page 1 Radioactive waste management programmes in OECD/NEA member countries – Overview International co-operation at the OECD/NEA concerning the management of radioactive waste and materials The role of the NEA Radioactive Waste Management Committee (RWMC) Radioactive waste and materials exist in countries Strategies with and without nuclar power programmes and need In particular, the RWMC facilitates the elaboration to be managed in a manner that is responsible to pres- of strategies for waste management and decommis- ent and future generations. Significant progress has sioning, including regulatory approaches, at the been achieved and considerable experience is avail- national and international levels by: able in NEA member countries on waste and mate- ● reviewing strategies adopted by member countries rials processing, conditioning, storage, transport and with a view to identify and analyse emerging tech- disposal. An important experience and knowledge nical, policy and regulatory issues and to forge base has also been developed as regards decommis- consensus views; sioning and dismantling nuclear installations. Special ● reviewing regulatory bases, requirements and efforts are being expended in the area of long-term criteria, and licensing processes, in addition to management of radioactive waste in order to continue proposing regulatory approaches; to integrate technical advances and societal demands ● in decision making as well as to understand and developing methodologies for evaluating long-term develop consensus views on regulatory and policy safety; ● issues. International co-operation amongst implemen- examining and developing criteria for stepwise ters, regulators, policy makers and R&D specialists is decision making; key to fostering a broader understanding of the issues ● organising peer reviews of national programmes at hand and formulating more widely accepted solu- for such activities as research and development, tions. The NEA Radioactive Waste Management performance assessment and safety cases, as Committee (RWMC) brings together those four requested; constituencies. ● preparing good-practice documents. Scientific and technical knowledge base Broad approach The RWMC contributes to the scientific and tech- The RWMC contributes to promoting a broad nical knowledge base for the management of radioac- approach to waste management issues through: tive waste and materials, and assists in the resolution ● the provision of multidisciplinary fora for the of relevant issues by: exchange of information and experience and for ● reviewing the scientific and technical knowledge of promoting a frank interchange in open dialogue geological disposal concepts and decommission- amongst its various constituencies; ing technology for nuclear facilities with a view to ● the provision of specialised fora, e.g. implicating identifying the state of the art and areas where regulators in identifying and addressing future additional efforts are required; regulatory challenges; ● promoting co-operative efforts to compile inter- ● preparing and disseminating brochures and nationally applicable data and information, and databases on national waste management and benchmarking exercises; decommissioning frameworks and management ● promoting joint technical initiatives in support of approaches, with a view to reaching opinion repository development and decommissioning formers and the wider public. technologies. © OECD 2005 1-OVERVIEW.qxp 16/11/05 17:18 Page 2 Radioactive waste management programmes in OECD/NEA member countries – Overview Major contributions There is today a broad international consensus in particular through the formulation of two interna- on the merits of the final disposal of long-lived radio- tional “collective opinions” and through the harmo- active waste in deep and stable geological forma- nisation of the basic pillars of long-term safety tions. This type of solution is essentially passive demonstrations (safety case). The Committee has and permanent, with no requirement for further inter- also made major contributions to better understanding vention or institutional control, although it may be and resolving the governance issues that long-term assumed that siting records and routine surveillance radioactive management projects raise. In particular, would in practice be maintained for many years, it has been the catalyst for establishing international as long as society evolves in a stable manner. The positions on the retrievability of waste and the revers- Radioactive Waste Management Committee has ibility of decisions, as well as for the implementation contributed significantly to achieving this consensus, of a stepwise approach to decision making. Radioactive waste management trends Modern societal demands on risk governance and due to the impacts on communities – are very impor- the widespread adoption of stepwise decision-making tant, but regulatory, technical and economic issues processes with stakeholder involvement have created exist as well. The RWMC created the Working Party a new working environment in radioactive waste man- on Decommissioning and Dismantling (WPDD) agement. The RWMC has formally acknowledged this to address such issues with the help of international by creating the Forum on Stakeholder Confidence expertise. (FSC) to identify, discuss and promote the new set of Finally, an area of traditional strength of the Com- approaches required from all parties involved in radio- mittee is the safety case for final disposal of long-lived active waste management. The FSC has created a waste deep underground. Technical and managerial neutral ground where interested parties meet and aspects of these activities are addressed by the discuss long-term waste management issues. Integration Group for the Safety Case (IGSC). Decommissioning issues are becoming increas- Through the expertise assembled in this group, the ingly important with the ageing of nuclear facilities in NEA is able to provide timely and highly regarded member countries. The decommissioning of nuclear peer reviews of national safety studies. National facilities is closely linked with radioactive waste man- requests for peer reviews have been increasing over agement, as the strategy for dealing with one cannot the years, and now represent a well-established be totally separated from the other. Social aspects – trend. Future work The RWMC will continue its activities concern- ● guiding principles and best practice for stakeholder ing the management of radioactive waste and involvement; materials and the dismantling of nuclear facilities, ● the role of regulation and the formulation of in particular: regulations that are proportionate and practical; ● the technical case for long-term safety; ● the formulation and support of long-term waste ● the consideration of management of radioactive management solutions that meet both technical waste and materials in the more general and social approval; environmental and sustainable development ● the stepwise approach to decision making; perspectives. This fact sheet is part of a compendium covering 20 OECD/NEA member countries. Material contained in this publication may be quoted freely, provided that the source is acknowledged. For further information, please contact: OECD Nuclear Energy Agency 12, boulevard des Îles, 92130 Issy-les-Moulineaux, France © OECD 2005 Tel.: +33 (01) 45 24 10 15, (66 2005 12 1 P) Fax: +33 (01) 45 24 11 10, Internet: www.nea.fr ISBN 92-64-01210-9 AUSTRALIA.qxp 17/11/05 10:54 Page 1 Radioactive waste management programmes in OECD/NEA member countries Australia National nuclear energy context ● Australia is practically the only developed country Limited, for the design, construction and commis- that does not use electricity, either indigenous or sioning of a replacement reactor for HIFAR. The imported, produced from nuclear energy. Government budgeted $ 286.4 million (at 1997 ● A proposal to build a 500 MWe nuclear power value) for the replacement reactor, and the project plant at Jervis Bay, NSW was abandoned in 1972. is on track to meet that figure. In April 2002 the Since then, Australia has pursued a policy of non- Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety reliance on nuclear power. Agency (ARPANSA – the national nuclear safety and radiation protection regulatory body) issued a ● Australia uses radioactive materials in medical, licence for construction of the reactor, and it is research and industrial processes. These currently expected that its commissioning will take beneficial uses of radioactivity generate small place in 2005. amounts of radioactive waste. ● The High Flux Australian Reactor (HIFAR) is the Breakdown of electricity sources only operational nuclear reactor in Australia. It is (in %) used for materials research, to produce 12% radioisotopes for medicine and industry and to Gas irradiate silicon for the high-performance computer industry. It is at the heart of almost all the research 8% activities of the Australian Nuclear Science and Hydro Technology Organisation (ANSTO) and supports 1% 78% those of several other organisations on the Lucas Other Coal Heights site near Sydney. HIFAR, which has oper- ated at