RD&D-Programme 2004 - SKB

A possible alternative scenario is that the investigations gradually make the choice of site
obvious, i.e. that one site proves to have such superior merits that the choice becomes given
at some point. This does not mean that the requirements on the selected site are changed
in any way. However, it can change the procedure and timetable in the final part of the site
investigation phase, since data collection on the site that is not being considered does not have
to be taken to the level required by a permit application, even though it should be complete
enough to permit comparisons in all relevant respects.
Another possibility is that the site investigations are delayed, but otherwise completed and
evaluated according to the plan for the reference case. The consequence may then be a corresponding
postponement of the entire timetable. Depending on the size of the delay, this may
have more or less significant consequences for the other parts of the nuclear waste programme.
A third possible scenario is that the site investigations do not qualify either alternative for a
siting application. The programme must then be revised. What this may mean depends to a
great extent on the stage at which a revision becomes necessary, for what reasons, and what the
prospects are for getting support for a modified programme. The probable way out is to propose
additional siting alternatives that can be incorporated into the selection pool and investigated.
What is clear is that the whole deep repository programme would then be considerably delayed,
with resultant risks and strains for e.g. continuity and personnel recruitment.
A5
Programme for low- and intermediate-level
waste (LILW)
A5.1 Current situation
Most of the low- and intermediate-level waste (LILW) that is produced today comes from
operation and maintenance of the nuclear power plants. Short-lived waste is disposed of in
the SFR facility (SFR-1). Waste containing larger fractions of long-lived radionuclides is
temporarily stored by the producers at the NPPs, or by SKB in Clab. Long-lived LILW from
research, hospitals etc is interim-stored in Studsvik. Final disposal of this waste lies outside of
SKB’s undertaking vis-à-vis the owners, however, and requires separate agreements. A small
portion, very low-level waste, is disposed of by shallow land burial in near-surface repositories
at the NPPs. This is a matter for the power companies and lies beyond SKB’s obligations.
The current situation and the programme for research and development concerning LILW are
described in Chapter 25. An overview of the planning to implement the remaining parts of the
LILW programme is provided in the following.
A5.2 Plan
Figure 13 shows the long-term planning for the whole LILW programme. The main points are
continued operation of the SFR facility for final disposal of operational waste, continued interim
storage of certain long-lived LILW at Clab, future extensions of SFR to receive waste from the
decommissioning of the NPPs, and in the longer term siting and extension of a special final
repository for other long-lived waste.
The scope and timetable of the LILW programme are dependent on the plans for operation,
phase-out and decommissioning of the NPPs. Figure 13 is based on the reference scenario that
the NPPs are operated for 40 years before shutdown, and are then deactivated and decommissioned
more or less immediately. There are indications today that the operating times will be as
long as 60 years or more. It is also conceivable that the nuclear power companies will choose
to let their plants stand a number of years to allow the radioactivity to decline before decommissioning
is begun in earnest. Accordingly, the need for space to dispose of decommissioning
waste may be postponed.
RD&D-Programme 2004 401