atw 2015-01

More documents

Info

atw Vol. 60 (2015) | Issue 1 ı January OPERATION AND NEW BUILD 18 Waste acceptance criteria The PHARE project PH4.10/94 had beneficiaries from multiple countries. In Romania, the beneficiary was the “Regia Autonoma pentru Metale Rare” (Rare Metals Autonomous Authority – RMAR). The other co-beneficiaries were institutions from Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia. The project provided the beneficiary country with comprehensive information on accepted EU practices in radioactive waste management and disposal, critical assessment of the methods employed in the beneficiary’s countries and methodology for the development of radioactive Waste Acceptance Criteria (WAC) for waste packages to ensure their safe transportation, handling, storage and disposal. The technical assistance provided for Romania covered the following: a presentation of the waste packages acceptance criteria methodology for all operating disposal facilities in the countries of the European Union; the performance of a technical study covering relevant aspects to define the waste packages acceptance criteria; and the development of the waste package acceptance criteria approach that will be applied to the planned disposal facilities. Waste characterization at Cernavoda NPP The project 5812.06.04 was the last PHARE project implemented in Romania in support of RWM activities. This project was also the only project in support of RWM having as beneficiary the nuclear operator: the Romanian National Electrical Company (Societatea Nationala “Nuclearelectrica” (SNN)). The project covered the aspects related to on-site radioactive waste characterisation in order to achieve the required level for accession to the European Union. The activities carried out were concise and referred to: the classification system based on physical form of the wastes (solid, organic liquid, inflammable solid-liquid mixes); the identification system, for each type of radioactive waste, based on their source, substance, radionuclide content and contact dose rate; and the on-site disposal facilities for each type of radioactive waste. The project resulted in the setting up of measuring equipment for waste characterisation, the development of methodologies for characterising the radionuclide content in low and intermediate level waste, the establishment of a database based on the waste characterisation system and the improvement of the capability of personnel of Cernavoda NPP to implement the characterisation programme. Last, but not least, a waste segregation management according to disposal route was implemented (e.g. free release, disposal in a landfill, disposal in a near-surface repository, and long-term storage pending the availability of a deep geological repository). Spent Sealed Radioactive Sources (SSRS) There was only one project implemented in Romania in respect of the management of the SSRS: SSRS/P01 “Management of Spent Sealed Radioactive Sources in Central and Eastern Europe”. This project was the shortest project in support of the RWM activities (12 months), and was also an international one having five beneficiary countries. During the project implementation, a study was performed to consider the situation relating to the regulation and management of spent sealed radioactive sources (SSRS) in five of the Central and Eastern European (C&EE) countries that were being considered for admission to the EU, namely, Bulgaria, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania and Slovakia (two previous studies had considered the situation in the current EU member states and in the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Poland and Slovenia). It should be noted that, at the date of the project, Romania was the only country in the study that manufactured SRS and had one national radioactive waste disposal facility that could accept SSRS. In addition, there were two interim storage facilities for SSRS. The project concluded that all the countries were proceeding with their radioactive waste management plans, taking account (to varying degrees) of international standards and practices relating to acceptable dose uptakes, environmental impact, etc. Such a situation was similar to that relating to the EU member states that had been studied, which had also not developed specific prescriptive disposal criteria for universal application across all states. Many improvements for radioactive waste management were recommended to the states and the implementation of these was expected to serve to further improve the situation and provide a long-term safe environment for the management of SSRS. In fact, the technical assistance offered for Romania covered the following: detection of radioactive material at the entrance of metal scrap facilities and at national borders; understanding of the full life-cycle of SRS, from manufacture through to disposal in order to avoid accidental inclusion of SSRS in consignments of scrap metal; development of the current regulations in order to include waste categorisation, facility licensing and SSRS disposal; and transferring of the old database that included SRS and related information, kept by CNCAN, to a new more practical one. 4. Projects related to On-Site Assistance The project with reference 009-RO/PHARE-SCR/A6-C was titled “Modernisation Project for Cernavoda NPP2 – Environmental Impact Assessment“. It should be noted that the aim of the project was not the assessment of the safety of the power plant design itself, but of the manner in which the safety-related, radiation protection and emergency response systems already were or would be realised at Cernavoda, and their compliance with Western standards and practices as far as relevant to the EIA. It was underlined that the overall radiation protection situation at the current Unit 1, which was assumed to be identical to that to be applied at Unit 2, was considered to be in compliance with relevant international standards and practices regarding the protection of both staff and population. The significance of some minor deviations was considered to be low and, additionally, they were understood to be resolved before the Unit 2 was put into operation. Furthermore, many design changes in the Cernavoda Unit 2 were observed with respect to its reference Unit, the Cernavoda Unit 1. Of these design improvements, the majority were related to safety and the mitigation of postulated accidents. Therefore, the dose estimates made for the Unit 1 could be assumed to be conservative for the Unit 2. The list of major changes planned for this unit included a number of the components and systems, such as the Heat Transport System (HTS) and its components, heat transport auxiliary systems, safety systems, instrumentation and control systems and the control room. Improvements had also been recommended by the consultant (HPC AG – the engineer enterprise) for safety analysis methodologies. 5. Discussion The projects in support of the Regulatory Authority targeted the areas considered as highest priority in the accession process with the aim of enhancing the effectiveness of the Romanian Nuclear Regulatory Authority and improving its competence and independent technical assessment capability. The type of intervention accomplished considered Operation and New Build Overview of PHARE Projects Implemented in Romania Between 1997 and 2008 for Enhancing the Nuclear Safety Level ı Radian Sanda, Benoit Zerger, Giustino Manna and Brian Farrar
atw Vol. 60 (2015) | Issue 1 ı January both the organisational and human dimensions of the Regulatory Authority, intervening on its operating procedures, capacity to equip itself with adequate Quality Management System and Procedures, and on the processes affecting the output of the Regulatory Authority activities. The intervention on the human dimension, i.e. the staff, of the Regulator was done by means of the implementation of targeted training. The transfer of know-how took place not only in theoretical terms but by exploiting opportunities of “learning by doing”, which allowed the staff to develop their skills and competences whilst approaching the open issues they were called to analyse and tackle. For example, the PHARE assistance for the implementation of the two Council Directives inherent radiation protection were combined with assistance for the revision of the regulations on radiation safety in the areas of radiotherapy, radio diagnosis, industry and nuclear medicine and the codes of practice for Dosimetry – in other words, the staff learned what the purposes and the meaning of the Council Directives were, while they were mentored on how to implement them. Furthermore, the assistance also supported CNCAN in enhancing its competences with respect to the tasks inherent in the Cernavoda NPP Unit 1 licensing process, the safety related seismic evaluation of the Cernavoda NPP, and the analysis of the of PSA for Cernavoda Unit 1. The projects which improved the Regulatory Authority competences in emergency management highlighted the need to consider the inter-institutional links whilst carrying out certain interventions. For this reason, the project on the early warning system for Cernavoda not only benefited the Regulatory Authority, but also the Ministry of Administration and Interior (MI) and the Ministry of Environment and Waters Management (MEWM). The PHARE projects also emphasised the need for attention to the trans-boundary effects of accidents. The projects also provided tools for the improvement of the Quality Management System of CNCAN, of the working methodology and performances of the Authority in inspection practices and emergency preparedness and in the conception and implementation of regulations, considering the relevant international and Western practices and legislation. The PHARE projects in support of radioactive waste management targeted several institutions, including CNCAN, all involved in the radioactive waste management area. These projects benefited from the opportunity to exploit synergies by addressing radioactive waste management issues which were a common denominator among the considered accession countries. The methodology adopted was similar to that followed in the implementation of the support to the Regulatory Authority, in the sense that the transfer of the EU knowledge and practices took place within the process of revision of the methods and practices adopted in the beneficiary’s country. Moreover, some projects focusing on the repository of Baita Bihor, provided direct guidance in the Safety Assessment for the Repository, the application of best EU practices in the upgrading and licensing of Baita-Bihor Repository, and its Preliminary Safety Analysis Report. Furthermore, the PHARE interventions aimed at supporting the establishment of the National Agency for Radioactive Waste (ANDRAD) and provided assistance to the implementation of the necessary separation of tasks and responsibilities between this Agency, CNCAN and the Nuclear Agency. The projects also provided training for developing the local skills, including those of the nuclear operator. While observing that in general there were 7 institutions involved in the projects’ implementation, the main beneficiary was the National Nuclear Regulatory Authority (CNCAN). CNCAN was involved not only in all the RA supporting projects, but also in four other PHARE projects supporting RWM. SNN was involved in two projects: the OSA project and one of the RWM projects. The other players were involved in one project each. The overall involvement distribution is illustrated in Figure 3. Although in each of the three improvement areas targeted by the projects there were pauses – for example, two pauses while implementing the PHARE projects in support of RA and RWM – at the country level the effort was much more continuous and extended to a period of 12 years (see Figure 4). It is worth to consider that in order to horizontally transfer the knowledge obtained by the implementing a project, some time is needed after the project is completed. After the 1 January 2007 (the day of Romania’s accession to the EU) there were two more PHARE projects implemented in Romania. Both of them addressed the field of RA – one of them aimed at improving the quality of the PSA | | Fig. 3. Distribution of beneficiaries among the PHARE projects. OPERATION AND NEW BUILD 19 | | Fig. 4. PHARE projects implementation timeline (red: Regulatory Authority; green: Radwaste Management; blue: On-Site Assistance). Operation and New Build Overview of PHARE Projects Implemented in Romania Between 1997 and 2008 for Enhancing the Nuclear Safety Level ı Radian Sanda, Benoit Zerger, Giustino Manna and Brian Farrar
Page 1 and 2: nucmag.com 2015 1 ISSN · 1431-5254
Page 3 and 4: atw Vol. 60 (2015) | Issue 1 ı Jan
Page 5 and 6: Kommunikation und Training für Ker
Page 17: atw Vol. 60 (2015) | Issue 1 ı Jan
Page 37 and 38: The International Expert Conference
Page 45 and 46: Unsere Jahrestagung - die gemeinsam
Page 67 and 68: nucmag.com The Whole Story of Nucle

atw 2015-01

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

Delete template?

Save as template?