Solid Radioactive Waste Strategy Report.pdf - UK EPR

More documents

Recommendations

Info

EPR UK N° NESH-G/2008/en/0123 REV. A PAGE 100 / 257 3. Where there are several reactors on the same site or several sites could be dismantled within a few years of each other, the implementation of a centralised facility for size reduction and packaging of reactors components may be feasible. This will: · Use the same installation to dismantle and pack components of several reactors, several sites; · Allow development of very specialised / heavy tools; · Important constraints to deal with the transport of such large components needs to be taken account of. 4. Final dismantling may be adapted to take advantage of radiological decay (as seen with the use of interim storage for short lived ILW). In this case, the decommissioning sequence would be as follows: · Removal of fissile materials (i.e. spent fuel) and radioactive liquids; · Survey of this “interim storage nuclear installation.” TABLE 27: ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF PROLONGING FINAL DISMANTLING – Advantages – Disadvantages · Take advantage of future improvements in decommissioning technology. · Allow decay of activated waste to limit quantity and volume of ILW (which is also the case with the interim storage requested) and in general allow some declassification of waste which will reduce the overall cost. · Avoid having to complete a full decontamination of the primary circuit. · Allow immediate transport of packaged ILW to the Geological Disposal Facility (if available). · Reduce dose uptake of dismantling operations. · Reduce the biological protection required (insitu and for the packaging). · Reduce the packed volume of waste (where radiological limits determine packaging factors) and then the associated cost. – 8.1.4 Baseline decommissioning scenario · Increased long term monitoring costs. · Potential loss of knowledge. · Constraints on the future development of the site. · Financial burden of extended care and maintenance of a disused facility. · Need for new handling and process equipment. · More stringent regulation. The decommissioning of a nuclear facility comprises several technical operations and administrative processes whose end point is the site’s regulatory de-licensing. The following decommissioning sequence applies and may proceed from the decision to the permanent shut down of the facility following regulatory consent to proceed: · Removal of fissile materials and radioactive liquids; post shutdown but with the nuclear systems still operational, full in-situ decontamination of primary circuit using a process such as CORD-UV. The removal of fissile materials, radiological liquids and most of the contamination eliminates the largest part of the radiological hazard. · Depending on the technical requirements, demolition or refurbishment of the conventional and non nuclear plant and construction of decommissioning specific service facilities; –
EPR UK N° NESH-G/2008/en/0123 REV. A PAGE 101 / 257 · Dismantling of the activated and contaminated equipment and structures · Demolishing and removal of what remains of the facility to a pre-defined end state which has been agreed with the Regulators and local planning officers, (partial or total de-licensing). In the reference case strategy the end state is assumed to include the radiological decontamination of all buildings and their demolition to one meter below ground level. The wastes produced by these operations will be removed from the site, possibly after interim storage on the site. This will almost certainly be the case for ILW. LLW and VLLW should be removed from site without the need for interim storage. The corresponding programme is outlined in Figure 26. This is an indicative decommissioning programme only. Decomissioning programmes will be defined by the utilities.
Page 1 and 2:
A 2008-11-26 Sarah Greenwood Gary C
Page 3 and 4:
EPR UK N° NESH-G/2008/en/0123 REV.
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50: EPR UK N° NESH-G/2008/en/0123 REV.
Page 51 and 52: 10 13 16 19 22 46 49 EPR UK N° NES
Page 99: EPR UK N° NESH-G/2008/en/0123 REV.
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
Page 257:
show all

Solid Radioactive Waste Strategy Report.pdf - UK EPR

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?