The 12th International Conference on Environmental ... - Events

Abstracts Session 24
Currently, of the many large nuclear installations permanently shut down, only a fraction have been or will be in the near term
totally dismantled and decommissioned to unrestricted release state. A trend towards immediate dismantling seems to emerge in
some countries, and is supported by IAEA positions, but this appears to be due to country-, site- or plant-specific conditions of limited
generic applicability.
In recent years, and often as the result of international efforts, the situation is evolving and provisions and infrastructures
including funding are being established to cope with decommissioning challenges. This factor seems in principle to encourage
immediate, total dismantling. However, the worldwide overview of decommissioning strategies does not offer a clear pattern. New
factors have come into being, such as stakeholder opinions, in particular those of local communities, and now play a significant
role in decision-making. <strong>The</strong> conditions of the nuclear industry at large (e.g. the nuclear renaissance) have considerably changed
over the last few years and are going to affect decommissioning. Strategies such as restricted release (brownfields), incremental
decommissioning or entombment seem to offer new prospects. <strong>The</strong> author reviewed the worldwide situation around the year 2000,
and offers in this paper some reflections about changed worlds conditions and how these affect the decommissioning scenarios.
3) A NATIONWIDE MODELLING APPROACH TO DECOMMISSIONING - 16182
Bernard Kelly, University of Manchester (UK); Paul E Mort,Sellafield Ltd. (UK);
Andrew J Lowe, University of Manchester (UK)
In this paper we describe a proposed UK national approach to modelling decommissioning. For the first time, we shall have
an insight into optimizing the safety and efficiency of a national decommissioning strategy. To do this we use the General Case
Integrated Waste Algorithm (GIA), a universal model of decommissioning nuclear plant, power plant, waste arisings and the associated
knowledge capture. <strong>The</strong> model scales from individual items of plant through cells, groups of cells, buildings, whole sites and
then on up to a national scale. We describe the national vision for GIA which can be broken down into three levels:
1) the capture of the chronological order of activities that an experienced decommissioner would use to decommission any
nuclear facility anywhere in the world this is Level 1 of GIA;
2) the construction of an Operational Research (OR) model based on Level 1 to allow rapid what if scenarios to be tested
quickly (Level 2);
3) the construction of a state of the art knowledge capture capability that allows future generations to learn from our current
decommissioning experience (Level 3).
We show the progress to date in developing GIA in levels 1 & 2. As part of level 1, GIA has assisted in the development of an
IMechE professional decommissioning qualification. Furthermore, we describe GIA as the basis of a UK-Owned database of
decommissioning norms for such things as costs, productivity, durations etc. From level 2, we report on a pilot study that has successfully
tested the basic principles for the OR numerical simulation of the algorithm. We then highlight the advantages of applying
the OR modelling approach nationally. In essence, a series of what if&scenarios can be tested that will improve the safety and
efficiency of decommissioning.
4) IMPLEMENTATION AND ONGOING DEVELOPMENT OF A COMPREHENSIVE PROGRAM
TO DEAL WITH CANADAS NUCLEAR LEGACY LIABILITIES - 16039
Douglas Metcalfe, Pui Wai Yuen, David McCauley, Natural Resources Canada (Canada);
Sheila Brooks, Joan Miller, Michael Stephens, Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (Canada)
Nuclear legacy liabilities have resulted from 60 years of nuclear research and development carried out on behalf of Canada by
the National Research Council (1944 to 1952) and Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL, 1952 to present). <strong>The</strong>se liabilities
are located at AECL research and prototype reactor sites, and consist of shutdown reactors, research facilities and associated infrastructure,
a wide variety of buried and stored waste, and contaminated lands.
In 2006, the Government of Canada adopted a new long-term strategy to deal with the nuclear legacy liabilities and initiated
a five-year, $520 million (Canadian dollars) start-up phase, thereby creating the Nuclear Legacy Liabilities Program (NLLP). <strong>The</strong>
objective of the long-term strategy is to safely and cost-effectively reduce risks and liabilities based on sound waste management
and environmental principles in the best interests of Canadians. <strong>The</strong> five-year plan is directed at addressing health, safety and environmental
priorities, accelerating the decontamination and demolition of shutdown buildings, and laying the groundwork for future
phases of the strategy. It also includes public consultation to inform the further development of the strategy and provides for continued
care and maintenance activities at the sites.
<strong>The</strong> NLLP is being implemented through a Memorandum of Understanding between Natural Resources Canada (NRCan) and
AECL whereby NRCan is responsible for policy direction and oversight, including control of funding, and AECL is responsible for
carrying out the work and holding and administering all licences, facilities and lands.
5) THE SWEDISH PROGRAM FOR FUTURE D&D OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS - 16143
Jan Carlsson, Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Co (SKB) (Sweden)
According to Swedish law anyone who has a license for a business in which radioactive waste is arising also has the responsibility
to make sure the waste is safely handled and disposed of. <strong>The</strong> major radioactive waste producers in Sweden are the Nuclear
Power Plants. <strong>The</strong> owners of the NPPs have jointly formed the Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Company, SKB, to
take care of their radioactive waste in a safe and economical way. In the facilities and systems built and operated by SKB also
radioactive waste from other, small, waste producers are accepted.
<strong>The</strong> 12 Swedish Nuclear Power Reactors are located at four sites. <strong>The</strong> reactors at one site, Barsebäck, have been shut down for
political reasons after about 25 years of operation while reactors at the other three sites are planned for 50 to 60 years of operation.
<strong>The</strong> basic decommissioning strategy is an early dismantling after the final shut down. One request is that a final repository for short
lived decommissioning waste shall be available before any major dismantling begins. A project for extension of the existing SFR
repository is in progress and the extension is expected to be in operation the year 2020. <strong>The</strong> first reactors to be dismantled are the
reactors at Barsebäck. Also already shut down and ready for dismantling are two small reactors, Ågesta in Stockholm and a research
reactor at the Studsvik site. <strong>The</strong> other reactors will be decommissioned from around the year 2030.
85