RSRL Integrated Waste Strategy - Issue 5- Oct 2012.pdf

More documents

Recommendations

Info

NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED• RSRL has a Final LoC from RWMD for Zenith fuel, which is currently being copackagedwith RHILW in 500-litre drums ready for immobilisation in cement in WEP212. Sources which arose via the former National Disposal Service (NDS) will be sizereduced by removal of inactive shielding if necessary before packaging. Some sourceshave been transferred from Winfrith and up until 2014 Harwell will continue to process lowlevel radioactive sources from the Sealed Source Disposal Programme.213. Large non-gaseous NDS sources that are too large or heavy to be placed into a 500-litredrum will be packaged into 3m 3 boxes and grouted in their current storage facility. Thegrouted boxes will be place in on-site long-term storage in a secure area pending finaldisposal to the GDF.214. A small volume of RHILW is estimated to arise during the decommissioning of the ActiveHandling Building. This will be packaged through the Head End Cell and WEP with legacyRHILW from the SWC. The majority of this waste is covered by the Letter of Compliance forRHILW.215. Legacy ILW liquors and sludges have been conditioned in the LETP immobilisation plantand are stored in the Vault Store until transfer to the GDF.6.1.2.2 Dragon Waste, Drummed CHILW, Concrete Lined Drums and Uranic Residues fortransfer to another NDA site.216. Dragon Waste consists of Highly Enriched Uranium micro-spheres containing heavymetal (U, Th & Pu) oxides and carbides coated in ceramic and carbon, mixed with graphiteand made into compacts. These compacts are currently stored in 251 stainless steel cansknown as ‘Third Length Containers’ (TLC’s).217. The strategy for Dragon Waste is to transfer it to Sellafield as part of the NM project.The proposal is to transfer two TLCs at a time in a 1.5 Modular Flask. The TLCs will bereceived in to the Magnox Encapsulation Plant cells for encapsulation in to 500 litre drumsfollowed by a period of long term storage pending final disposal in the GDF.218. The Contact Handled LW in drums consists mainly of plutonium contaminated materialbut also includes other ILW with radiation levels
NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED221. The CLDs will be placed in long term storage at Sellafield pending processing andpackaging via a previously planned waste treatment plant at Sellafield, pending finaldisposal to the GDF.222. The site waste BPEO Study determined direct encapsulation at Harwell to be the highestscoring option for the management of CHILW in drums and concrete lined drums, withsupercompaction at Harwell and Sellafield a close second and third respectively. Sincecompletion of this BPEO study, options for processing and storage of nuclear materials atSellafield have become more technically feasible. A BAT assessment including severaloptions in addition to those considered in the BPEO study has been carried out to underpinthe NM transfers programme. A summary of the changes to the preferred option for the NMstream as a result of the BAT assessment will be shared with local stakeholders.223. In the site waste BPEO study the preferred option for the management of low enricheduranium (LEU), natural uranium and depleted uranium was identified as recycling of thematerial in the UK. RSRL has looked into the possibility of transferring the LEU toSpringfields for processing through their Enriched Uranium Residues Recovery Plant,however, due to no handshake being achieved between RSRL and Springfields, thereference strategy has been processing and encapsulation on site followed by long-termstorage. Whilst this remains the strategy for stocks of natural and depleted uranium thestrategy for LEU is to transfer it to Sellafield as part of the NM project.224. The proposal is to transfer LEU drums using the Novapak container and receive theminto the THORP UO3 Store at Sellafield. The drums will remain in long term storagepending processing and packaging via a new waste treatment plant (WTC2) prior to finaldisposal to the GDF. It should be noted that the transfer of LEU to Springfields is stillidentified as an opportunity in the current LTP baseline. The volumes of uranium at Harwellare small compared to the rest of the nuclear industry and there is also an opportunity forNDA to formulate a nationwide strategy for uranic residues.6.1.2.3 Reactor Decommissioning ILW225. For the reactors on the Harwell site the preferred option in the site waste BPEO studywas to delay decommissioning until 2040. However this strategy is not consistent with theHarwell site programme to achieve a passive safe state and it also leaves adecommissioning liability to a future generation. The reference strategy for ILW arising fromthe decommissioning of the reactors, BEPO, DIDO and PLUTO, is therefore packaging intoRCBs prior to 2030. Some 361m 3 of reactor decommissioning ILW is graphite and will beheat treated so that any Wigner energy is released before packaging for disposal. Work willbe done during the planning and preparation phase of decommissioning to determinewhether annealing is required and whether some of the waste could subsequently beconsigned as LLW. The graphite will therefore be stored in an un-encapsulated form, asdetermined to be the preferred option in the site waste BPEO study, until decisionsregarding annealing and grouting have been finalised. Nevertheless the boxes are plannedto be stored in the Harwell ILW store until they are transferred to the GDF.226. A major assumption in the current LTP baseline is the availability of the GDF for ILWdisposal. The location for the GDF has not yet been identified but it is assumed to beavailable from 2040. Scope, schedule and costs for the long-term storage of ILW on theHarwell site are included in the current LTP, as are the transport costs from Harwell to theGDF.RSRL IWS (Issue 5 – October 2012)65
Page 1:
NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKEDRSRL Waste P
Page 4 and 5:
NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED8. There hav
Page 6 and 7:
NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKEDmethods for
Page 8 and 9:
NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKEDContents1 EX
Page 10 and 11:
NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKEDFiguresFigur
Page 12 and 13:
NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED2.1 Backgrou
Page 14 and 15: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKEDWinfrith sit
Page 16 and 17: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKEDtransfer to
Page 18 and 19: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED3 WASTE MANA
Page 20 and 21: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKEDFigure 1: Wa
Page 22 and 23: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED67. Effectiv
Page 24 and 25: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED3.1.6 Good P
Page 26 and 27: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKEDInteractions
Page 28 and 29: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKEDFigure 5: Th
Page 30 and 31: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED96. PRC 0199
Page 32 and 33: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED103. Technic
Page 34 and 35: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED113. The ter
Page 36 and 37: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKEDThe procedur
Page 38 and 39: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED4.3.4 Techni
Page 40 and 41: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED4.4.1.1 Harw
Page 42 and 43: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKEDNDA STRATEGI
Page 44 and 45: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKEDAssumptionMa
Page 46 and 47: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKEDThreatPossib
Page 48 and 49: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED4.5.3 Intera
Page 50 and 51: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED(WSSG). The
Page 52 and 53: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED5 OVERVIEW O
Page 54 and 55: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKEDFuture stora
Page 56 and 57: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED5.2 Winfrith
Page 58 and 59: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKEDWaste TypeSG
Page 60 and 61: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED• Final Lo
Page 62 and 63: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKEDILWArising /
Page 66 and 67: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED6.1.2.4 CoRW
Page 68 and 69: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED6.1.3 Low Le
Page 70 and 71: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED241. For cer
Page 72 and 73: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED6.2 Radioact
Page 74 and 75: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKEDSurface wate
Page 76 and 77: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKEDto atmospher
Page 78 and 79: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED6.3.3 Inert
Page 80 and 81: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED6.3.4 Non-Ra
Page 82 and 83: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED7 WINFRITH I
Page 84 and 85: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED304. The bas
Page 86 and 87: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED7.1.3 Low Le
Page 88 and 89: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED321. A forwa
Page 90 and 91: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED7.1.4 Other
Page 92 and 93: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKEDliquid efflu
Page 94 and 95: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKEDRadioactiveL
Page 96 and 97: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKEDwaste are to
Page 98 and 99: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED7.3.4 Non-Ra
Page 100 and 101: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED8 AREAS REQU
Page 102 and 103: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKEDOpportunityT
Page 104 and 105: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED9 CONCLUSION
Page 106 and 107: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKEDANNEX LISTAn
Page 108 and 109: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKEDANNEX 2: AUT
Page 110 and 111: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKEDANNEX 3: REG
Page 112 and 113: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKEDOSPAR Conven
Page 114 and 115:
NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKEDSite Waste M
Page 116 and 117:
NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKEDLegal interp
Page 118 and 119:
NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKEDanalysis. If
Page 120 and 121:
NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKEDHV-VLLW comp
Page 122 and 123:
NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKEDenvironmenta
Page 124:
NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKEDNDANDSNHZNIA
show all

RSRL Integrated Waste Strategy - Issue 5- Oct 2012.pdf

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?