2009 Report to Government on National Research and

5.40 Early in <strong>2009</strong> the emphasis in RWMD planning seemed <strong>to</strong> be on site
characterisation and on confirming that R&D results obtained in the labora<strong>to</strong>ry or
in URFs in other countries would be applicable <strong>to</strong> the specific site at which it is
proposed <strong>to</strong> construct a GDF in the UK (NDA, <strong>2009</strong>b). This would be similar <strong>to</strong>
the approach in Finland, where the ONKALO facility at the Olkiluo<strong>to</strong> GDF site is
<strong>to</strong> be used for characterisation and confirmation but not for extensive R&D.
However, scientists from Finland have for many years participated in R&D
programmes in URFs in Sweden, which are in geological environments that are
relevant <strong>to</strong> Olkiluo<strong>to</strong>. RWMD has recently indicated that its underground
investigations will include R&D <strong>to</strong> address uncertainties and support safety case
development (CoRWM doc. 2630; NDA, <strong>2009</strong>k).
Conclusions on Infrastructure for R&D
Active Facilities
5.41 The UK has a limited number of facilities that are able <strong>to</strong> support research with
radioactive materials. In particular, the country has very few research facilities in
which it is possible <strong>to</strong> handle materials with levels of radioactivity above the very
low concentrations found in the environment. The key facilities are those run by
the NNL, which as a result of rationalisation operates the majority of the UK’s
active civil research infrastructure.
5.42 In CoRWM’s view, the NNL’s currently planned facilities, even when fully
commissioned, will be inadequate <strong>to</strong> support the full range of research required
<strong>to</strong> manage higher activity wastes. Significant improvements and additional
facilities are needed <strong>to</strong> provide the UK with the capability <strong>to</strong> do research for its
wide range of higher activity wastes.
5.43 It is unclear <strong>to</strong> CoRWM how the NNL facilities will be made available for the full
spectrum of research that is needed <strong>to</strong> underpin the MRWS programme. The
only R&D that can be performed in NNL facilities is that funded by NNL
cus<strong>to</strong>mers, namely NDA and other nuclear industry organisations, who are
unlikely <strong>to</strong> support much fundamental research. There is currently no mechanism
for the Research Councils <strong>to</strong> fund university research carried out in NNL active
facilities, particularly that for which equipment must be bought.
5.44 CoRWM believes that further development of NNL facilities for research with
highly radioactive materials, and greater access <strong>to</strong> them, are the only realistic
route <strong>to</strong> the provision of the national research infrastructure needed for the
management of higher activity wastes.
Underground Research Facilities
5.45 It is clear <strong>to</strong> CoRWM that both underground site characterisation and
underground R&D are needed at any prospective GDF site in the UK. Surfacebased
investigations will not be sufficient for site characterisation. Even with the
latest investigative techniques, significant underground site characterisation will
be required in relation <strong>to</strong> rock mass characteristics, hydrogeology, geochemistry
and stress conditions. Underground R&D will be needed <strong>to</strong> inform GDF design
and support safety case development, including by finding out whether R&D
results obtained elsewhere are applicable <strong>to</strong> a UK site. In practice, there is
CoRWM Document 2543, Oc<strong>to</strong>ber <strong>2009</strong> Page 87 of 151