Solid Radioactive Waste Strategy Report.pdf - UK EPR

More documents

Recommendations

Info

EPR UK N° NESH-G/2008/en/0123 REV. A PAGE 62 / 257 Application · Treatment of all types of liquid effluent for the removal of undissolved suspended solids. Design Data · System throughput: 1-10 m³/h (typical); · Decontamination factor: 2-10 (system and nuclide specific, typical values). Advantages · Cost effective; · Proven and compact design; · Automatic operation. Disadvantages · Process has to be carried out in batches; · Secondary waste produced in the form of spent filter cartridges; · Filter has to be appropriately sized to enable through flow of liquid to stop unnecessary binding and secondary waste generation. 7.3.5 Liquid Effluent Treatment Using Ion Exchangers Ion exchangers can be used to remove dissolved material from radioactive liquid effluent [Ref.39]. The combination of selective anionic and cationic media allow the removal of nonradioactive and radioactive impurities. Ion selective media are added to the treatment system where there is a requirement to remove specific radionuclides. Following treatment, the clean liquid effluent is continuously monitored prior to discharge. The depleted exchange media are then either regenerated for continued use or transferred to the appropriate waste conditioning system. Application · Treatment of all types of liquid effluent for the removal of dissolved material. Design Data · System throughput: 1-10 m³/h (typical); · Decontamination factor: 2-10 (system and nuclide specific, typical values).
EPR UK N° NESH-G/2008/en/0123 REV. A PAGE 63 / 257 Advantages · Cost effective; · Proven and compact design; · Automatic operation. Disadvantages · Only suitable for dissolved ionic species (e.g. not suitable for particulate cobalt); · Feed stream needs pH conditioning and may need pre-filtering since particulates in the feed stream can foul (block) the ion-exchange beds or pass straight through the bed; · A variation in pH or competing ions in the feed can cause the target ions to be displaced back into solution. 7.3.6 Solid Waste Treatment By Segregation Segregation ideally starts at the point of origin with in-situ separation processes. For example, this includes sorting of the contaminated solid waste into categories that allows routing to further treatment processes. Solid Waste Segregation In The Controlled Area Workshop Large and heterogeneous waste (e.g. worn out items) is either segregated in-situ or sent to the controlled area workshop for segregation and size reduction using dedicated cutting equipment. Components are repaired where possible to minimise waste production. However, it is not always practicable to repair components in this way. For example, some pumps, valves and motors cannot be repaired in-situ. These waste components will be reduced in size and sent for treatment as appropriate [Refs.40 and 35]. Careful decontamination and size reduction can facilitate the removal of the most contaminated areas on a redundant item. This may facilitate only a small proportion of the waste being categorised as radioactive. The remainder of the waste item can sent for disposal as controlled waste. Solid Waste Segregation In A Sorting Box A sorting box will be used to verify the efficiency of the in-situ separation of waste placed directly into a disposal drum. In addition it will also serve as a primary segregation device to safely separate waste in accordance with the selected downstream waste treatment technique. The majority of the bulk solid waste material will be routed through the sorting box. The use of this technique will permit manual sorting of the waste into the different waste types. Application · Segregation can be used for contaminated solid waste.
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: 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 61: EPR UK N° NESH-G/2008/en/0123 REV.
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
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

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?