RD&D-Programme 2004 - SKB

20.2 Review of RD&D 2001
Following are the most important comments from various reviewers on the biosphere programme
in RD&D 2001. General comments on RD&D 2001 are responded to below, while
specific viewpoints are commented on in the following programme descriptions. The authorities
presented their review and decision regarding the renewed safety assessment of SFR, called
Safe, in the spring of 2004. Their viewpoints will be worked into the research programme for
the upcoming six-year period, if possible.
In the review of the biosphere programme in RD&D 2001, all the regulatory authorities (SKI,
SSI and Kasam) judged the programme to be both methodical and ambitious. They further
commented that SKB’s ambition to publish in international journals was positive. Both SSI and
SKI wanted to see more concrete plans for how the transition between biosphere and geosphere
will be handled by SKB, especially with respect to the site investigations. Kasam offered similar
viewpoints when it comes to the link between recipients and geohydrology. Newfound experience
as well as the coming programme are described in sections 20.4 and 20.5 and Chapter 19.
SSI and Kasam are positive to the systems ecology approach and proposed typical ecosystems,
but would like to see descriptions of how different systems are linked together and a plan for
development and coordination in conjunction with the site investigations. This is described
in the planning report for SR-Can /20-1/ and in the strategy report for the site descriptive
modelling of the biosphere /20-2/. These documents make it clear that model development is
being pursued in parallel with the site investigations, since model development is dependent
on understanding and data gained from the sites.
SSI is positive to the description of the biosphere processes, but desires more extensive
documentation and that the RD&D report be written in process form for the biosphere as well.
The intention of this RD&D report has been to fulfil this desire. Since there are many processes
in the biosphere and they are included in many scientific disciplines (geology, chemistry,
hydrology, meteorology, oceanography, ecology, etc), it has been difficult to find available
experts who have the qualifications and the time to carry out an interdisciplinary synthesis. It is
also doubtful whether the review of the biosphere programme is facilitated by the fact that it is
in process form, since the process descriptions cut across the disciplines. However, the ambition
is still to write a process report for SR-Can and the next RD&D report.
SSI appreciates the fact that SKB participated in Fasset, but would like to see a discussion
of how the results will be used in the safety assessment and the site investigations. When
RD&D-Programme 2001 was written, no results were available from Fasset so it was not easy
to describe how they were going to be used. As far as site investigations are concerned, data
already collected will far exceed the needs indicated by Fasset. SKB’s continued programme
for the environment is described in section 20.10.
SKI notes with satisfaction that work with inventories and monitoring programmes within the
site investigations has been started. SSI wants future monitoring programmes to be investigated.
This has been done in SKB’s Programme for monitoring, see Chapter 12. In this context,
Kasam wants indicators to be established for impact on the biosphere. Since the limit for the
permissible quantity of radionuclides falls far short of the background radiation level, it is not
likely that any change of the biosphere will be measurable.
SSI and Kasam want particular attention to be given to accumulation and release of radionuclides
in seabeds and sediments, since the sites are near the coast. Obtained results and the
planned work are described in greater detail in sections 20.5 and 20.7. SKI calls for continued
work with alternative safety indicators and Kasam would similarly like the risks to be compared
with other risks. This work is closely linked to the EIA work, while other safety indicators are
more related to the geosphere research programme. According to SSI’s regulations /20-3/, the
dose to today’s biosphere shall be a comparison measure, and this is a good indicator of how the
repository’s barriers perform during all periods.
274 RD&D-Programme 2004