Panel Report

In reviewing AECL's concept, the Panel should become fully aware of the programs of other leading countries in this field, in particular those countries' consideration of different geological media and their development of appropriate plans and schedules for siting and construction of nuclear fuel waste management facilities.

Terms of Reference

This appendix provides a global context for high-level nuclear fuel waste management and illustrates where Atomic Energy of Canada Limited's (AECL's) concept for deep geological disposal fits into the international consensus on managing wastes. It highlights nine countries' programs for managing nuclear wastes. For specific details concerning the disposal concepts of these countries, refer to Table K-2 at the end of this appendix.

Most countries with significant nuclear power programs are developing a management strategy involving geological disposal of radioactive wastes. These programs and research focus on one waste facility in each country. These facilities are expected to be operational by the first quarter of the next century. To date, no country has successfully implemented a disposal facility for high-level nuclear wastes. The contributions of nuclear power to the total electricity produced in each country in 1995 are shown in Table K-1.

Belguim

Organization

The National Agency for Radioactive Waste and Enriched Fissile Materials (ONDRAF/NIRAS) is a public agency established under Belgian legislation that is responsible for managing nuclear wastes. It will centralize all domestic radioactive wastes at one site for several decades and then proceed to dispose of the material in deep geological formations. Fiscal responsibility for disposal lies with the waste producers. who contribute to a fund managed by ONDRAF/NIRAS.

Primary Concept

In addition to protecting human life and the environment from the risks of radiation, the Belgian management program is designed to maintain the safety of future generations and provide a non-reversible, long-term concept for disposing of high-level nuclear wastes.

Table K-1: Nuclear Power Contributions to Total Electricity Generation in 1995*

Country	Number of Operating Nuclear Reactors	Percentage of Country's Electricity Generated by Nuclear Reactors
Belgium	7	55.5
Canada	21	17.3
Finland	4	29.9
France	56	76.1
Germany	20	29.1
Netherlands	2	3.7
Sweden	12	46.6
Switzerland	5	39.9
United Kingdom	35	25.0
United States	109	22.5

* "Nuclear Power Contributions in 1995," Nuclear News, June 1996, p. 36.

The Belgian concept involves disposing of wastes at a depth of 200 to 300 metres within the plastic "Boom" clay formation, which underlies the Mol-Dessel nuclear generating station. [F. Decamps, Radioactive Waste Management and Dismantling of Nuclear Facilities in Belgium - General Organization and Implementation, (paper presented at the International Conference for Peaceful Applications of Nuclear Energy, October 1992), p. 22.] The proposed repository is an axial burial configuration consisting of secondary burial galleries that lead to two main galleries. High-level vitrified reprocessed wastes, along with severed spent fuel rods encased in a concrete matrix, will be disposed of in the repository. The disposal galleries will be lined with concrete blocks and vitrified reprocessed wastes will be placed parallel to the central axis of the secondary galleries, surrounded by spent fuel canisters.

Centralized Interim Storage

The Belgian program is based on the principles of reducing waste volumes; standardizing waste packages; and placing wastes in a central storage facility until the responsible parties choose a method and site for final disposal. High-level nuclear wastes will be kept in interim storage for 50 years. Wastes will be collected from nuclear sites throughout the country and transported to the nuclear facility site at Mol-Dessel. At the site, wastes will be standardized, if necessary, then stored in specially designed buildings. The storage facility for high-level vitrified reprocessed wastes at Mol-Dessel was completed in 1996.

Site Selection Process and Public Participation

The site selection process is highly dependent on the geological factors of seismicity, lithology, hydrology, permeability and geometric characteristics. The Belgian Nuclear Waste Management Authorities (CEN/SCK) began compiling an inventory of potential locations for repositories based on these factors in the 1970s. However, they agreed to cease siting investigations and concentrate their repository research and development on the Boom clay site beneath the Mol-Dessel nuclear generating facility. They decided to investigate only one method and one site for disposal because of the advantages of centralizing all high-level wastes under a nuclear facility: land availability, presence of multi-disciplinary personnel and laboratories, proximity to the site and an immediate solution for disposing of reprocessed wastes produced at the reactor.

There is no formal public participation process; however, ONDRAF/NIRAS distributes literature and promotes educational programs on nuclear waste management and disposal.

The current reference schedule for nuclear waste management activities is as follows:

• detailed study of repository: 2015
• construction of underground burial installation: 2020
• burial of non-vitrified wastes: 2035
• burial of vitrified wastes: 2040
• closure of site: 2070-2080 [National Agency for Radioactive Waste and Enriched Fissile Materials, The Belgian Deep Repository Project, (1990), p. 4.]

Finland

Organization

The Finnish approach to long-term management of nuclear wastes is embodied in legislation. The two largest utility companies in the nation, TVO and IVO, have formed a jointly owned company named Posiva Oy to manage and dispose of nuclear wastes. Fiscal responsibility for the disposal of wastes has been defined in national legislation. Utilities contribute to a segregated fund overseen by the Ministry of Trade and Industry.

Primary Concept

Because they have limited financial resources for managing high-level wastes, Finnish officials would prefer a joint project with a larger national waste management program over an individual venture. Regardless of these preferences, Posiva Oy is developing a concept for deep geological disposal of high-level nuclear wastes.

The Finnish concept proposes burial of spent fuel at a depth of 500 metres in crystalline plutonic rock formations. The tunnel network will be adapted to features of the local bedrock. [Veijo Ryhanen, "Posiva - A New Company for the Disposal of Spent Fuel in Finland", p. 10, (paper presented at the International Conference on Deep Geological Disposal of Radioactive Waste, Winnipeg, September 16-19, 1996).] Spent fuel canisters will be vertically emplaced and surrounded with a bentonite clay buffer in drilled boreholes in the floors of disposal tunnels.

Centralized Interim Storage

The Finnish program includes an extended period of interim storage of waste fuel, to leave the option of disposal or reprocessing open for discussion; however, the main focus of the management program is deep geological disposal.

Site Selection Process and Public Participation

All potential sites for a repository are situated in crystalline plutonic rock formations. Introductory site investigations were carried out between 1987 and 1992 in five areas. [Veijo Ryhanen, "Posiva - A New Company for the Disposal of Spent Fuel in Finland", p. 10-11.] These sites were analyzed for their geological, geophysical, hydrogeological and geochemical attributes. Results from these investigations eliminated two sites from the five potential host locations. The remaining three continue to undergo detailed characterization studies. Posiva Oy intends to identify a final location by 2000 and commence disposal of wastes by 2020. [Veijo Ryhanen, "Posiva - A New Company for the Disposal of Spent Fuel in Finland", p. 12.]

No formal public review process is planned in Finland; however, the landowner and Posiva Oy must reach an agreement before siting activities proceed. The company encourages local municipalities to participate in its activities and promotes open dialogue by hosting forums and public consultations, and by distributing information in affected community areas.

France

Organization

French legislation states that a government entity, ANDRA, is responsible for the long-term management of radioactive wastes. Waste generators must pay the cost of disposing of wastes, as defined in government policy. The collected monies are not placed in a segregated fund, but will be available when required. The ministers of environment, industry and research will oversee the distribution of these funds.

Primary Concept

National legislation, resulting from a review of the waste management program, requires the construction of two underground research laboratories. Vitrified reprocessed wastes will be placed in these facilities only after a 15-year interim storage period and after the French parliament approves the transformation of the underground laboratory into a geological repository. A nuclear waste negotiator will conduct the site selection process, which will be voluntary.

Site Selection Process and Public Participation

Since 1990, many sites have been screened for a potential underground research laboratory, using geological criteria. Three areas (two in clay and one in granite) with sufficient local support were chosen for preliminary investigations. In the near future, the government will recommend two sites.

Public participation in the siting process takes place through the construction and planning applications. Each permit and authorization is subject to a safety evaluation and public consultation. Project information and the environmental impact statement are made available to the public for comment. A local committee considers these comments and makes recommendations on the applications, which local courts and councils then review. A public hearing can be held to examine the concerns of the local community.

Geological Disposal

The government has decided to initiate site analyses related to geological disposal in various media (granite, clay and salt). It has not developed specific details concerning canisters, vault design, vault sealing and waste emplacement.

Alternative Approaches

The High-level Waste Act 1992 states that research and development programs will be undertaken concurrently to study waste storage in deep geological formations; transmutation; packaging and processes involved in long-term surface storage; and the feasibility of retrievable or non-retrievable disposal in deep geological formations.

Germany

Organization

The German government has delegated authority for the long-term storage and disposal of radioactive wastes to the Federal Agency for Radiation Protection (BFS). BFS will implement the German concept for disposing of high-level nuclear fuel wastes. Under theNational Financing Act, waste generators and the federal government must fund the management of wastes, as required. The Ministry of Environment will oversee these resources.

Primary Concept

Due to the country's high population density, the federal government decided to dispose of all forms of radioactive wastes within deep geological formations. In the 1980s, comprehensive studies were undertaken to compare the feasibility of reprocessing of nuclear wastes and of deep geological disposal. Based on those studies, direct disposal is now the favoured option.

Plans are to dispose of high-level nuclear wastes at a depth of 840-1200 metres in a large salt dome formation at the Gorleben site. [H. Rothemeyer, "The Role of Performance Assessment", p. 4, (paper presented at the International Conference on Deep Geological Disposal of Radioactive Waste, Winnipeg, September 16-19, 1996).] The repository design entails two exploratory driftways, which will be driven to the northeast and southwest of the site. These driftways will be connected by eight cross cuts, and numerous exploratory drifts will be drilled horizontally and vertically in the repository.

Centralized Interim Storage

High-level nuclear wastes will remain in an interim storage facility at Gorleben for at least 50 years before permanent disposal. After such time, a final decision will be taken on the deep geological disposal of nuclear fuel wastes.

Site Selection Process and Public Participation

The siting process explores the sub-surface environment to acquire information to evaluate the safety of a repository. In the initial stages, geological criteria are used to locate suitable sites. Once potential sites are identified, these areas are evaluated for potential health, environmental and socio-economic impacts.

To construct a repository, applicants must seek a "planned approval licence." The licensing body must evaluate the licence application and take into account all interests and concerns expressed by those involved in the project, including the federal government, the implementing organization, non-governmental organizations and local communities.

A public consultation process takes place before a decision is made; however, there is no formal public review process. Only one site, Gorleben, is involved in siting investigations at this time. The German government intends to begin disposing of nuclear wastes at the Gorleben site no earlier than 2012. [H. Rothemeyer, "The Role of Performance Assessment", p. 5.] However, these disposal plans may not succeed because there is significant public opposition to plans for managing nuclear wastes. In 1996, many public demonstrations took place during the transportation of reprocessed wastes to the Gorleben storage site.

Netherlands

Organization

The Central Organization for Radioactive Waste (COVRA) manages and disposes of nuclear wastes in the Netherlands. A joint venture between waste producers and the government, it will be the implementing organization for disposal. Waste producers fund COVRA's activities.

Centralized Interim Storage

All radioactive wastes in the Netherlands will be stored at one location for between 50 to 100 years before disposal. [Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, Nuclear Energy Agency, "Update on Waste Management Policies and Programs," Nuclear Waste Bulletin, 11 (June 1996), p. 37.] During this period, the Dutch government will choose a more permanent strategy for managing wastes. COVRA has designed a dry storage system for high-level nuclear wastes and applied for a new permit to construct the facility. Officials feel there is no urgency to proceed to the next step of field investigations and siting activities for a deep geological repository.

Site Selection Process and Public Participation

Local and regional permits must be issued before actual field and site investigations can occur. Public comments are made on licence applications for field investigations, but there is no formal public review of these activities.

Geological Disposal

COVRA has investigated three types of geological formations for a deep geological repository for non-retrievable wastes: rock salt, clay and metamorphic rock. After performing initial research studies, COVRA decided that rock salt had the most favourable geological properties. Research programs concentrated on three particular salt formations: bedded salt, salt domes and salt pillows. The vault layout was based on a conventional mine design. Canisters containing high-level nuclear fuel wastes would be emplaced in boreholes drilled into the floors of galleries. Major decisions concerning canister fabrication, canister material and sealing materials were not made, pending selection of a specific geological medium. However, the Dutch government recently decided that a method that did not permit retrieval was not acceptable. Therefore, the government rejected non-retrievable disposal of nuclear fuel wastes in rock salt and recommended terminating these research activities.

Alternative Approaches

The Dutch program for managing nuclear fuel wastes is designed to be flexible. COVRA is taking a new direction; it is now researching the use of geological media for retrievable disposal of nuclear fuel wastes. By investigating disposal concepts that permit retrieval, continuing transmutation research and storage of wastes at the COVRA facility for an extended period, COVRA is laying the basis for alternative approaches to long-term management of nuclear fuel wastes.

Sweden

Organization

In Sweden, legislation assigns fiscal and technical responsibilities for the safe management of nuclear fuel wastes. The Swedish Nuclear Fuel Waste and Management Company, SKB, is a jointly owned organization established by four nuclear utility companies to meet the legislative requirements for managing and disposing of nuclear wastes. To cover the costs of the management program, the utilities contribute to a fund controlled and overseen by the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources.

Sweden currently endorses a moratorium on building nuclear power plants and intends to phase out nuclear power by 2010. [Claes Thegerstrom, in Nuclear Fuel Waste Environmental Assessment Panel Public Hearings Transcripts, March 11, 1996, p. 187.] The planned nuclear phase-out has helped advance the disposal program. However, the issue of nuclear power is still being debated in Parliament and details on implementing the phase-out have not been determined. A decision on electricity production may not be taken until 2010, and so the use of nuclear power may continue. [Claes Thegerstrom, in Nuclear Fuel Waste Environmental Assessment Panel Public Hearings Transcripts, March 11, 1996, p. 187.]

Primary Concept

SKB intends to implement a safe deep geological disposal option that does not rely on long-term institutional controls. The concept is based on a multiple barrier design (KBS-3), which is not dependent on a single barrier for absolute safety. Final disposal of high-level nuclear wastes will take place at a depth of approximately 500 metres within crystalline plutonic rock. [Claes Thegerstrom, The Swedish Programme for Long-term Management of Nuclear Fuel Waste (PHPub.082, March 1996), p. 3.] The repository will consist of a system of parallel tunnels interconnected to one central tunnel. Spent fuel assemblies will be encapsulated in canisters and vertically emplaced in boreholes drilled into the floors of the tunnels.

The Swedish Nuclear Power Inspectorate (SKI) plays an important role in nuclear waste management. The organization researches and develops alternative waste disposal methods and reviews the nuclear-related activities of other organizations, such as SKB. It is SKI's responsibility to evaluate SKB's disposal concept and to determine its feasibility. To do so, SKI initiated a performance assessment project, SITE-94, in 1992. It completed the final report on the initiative in 1996.

The project assessed the performance of a hypothetical repository located in the Aspo Hard Rock Laboratory, using SKB's KBS-3 design and actual field data. Its main objectives were to determine how site-specific data should be used within the assessment; to evaluate how uncertainties in site characterization would influence performance assessment results; to develop a practical and defensible methodology for defining, constructing and analyzing scenarios; to develop approaches to treating uncertainties; to evaluate canister integrity; and to develop and apply an appropriate quality assurance plan for performance assessments. [Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, Nuclear Energy Agency, "Update on Waste Management Policies and Programs," Nuclear Waste Bulletin, 8 (July 1993), p. 29.] After analyzing the performance assessment results, SKI reaffirmed its conclusion that safe final disposal of spent fuel is feasible in Sweden and that the KBS-3 disposal concept is a realistic main choice for SKB's future research and development. Future SKI research initiatives will focus on uncertainties in the area of long-term performance of the canister and the geosphere.

Centralized Interim Storage

SKB has decided to place all forms of long-lived nuclear wastes into interim storage for at least 40 years. This will allow the radioactivity of the spent fuel to decay further and give Sweden time to choose an option for the final disposal of nuclear fuel wastes. The country will not make ultimate decisions on final disposal until the strategy and technology for disposal have been optimized and there is little risk that the method proposed will be an incorrect choice in the future.

After it is removed from nuclear reactors, all spent fuel is currently stored at the Central Interim Storage Facility (CLAB) for at least 40 years. The facility is 30 metres underground in a rock cavern that is reinforced with shotcrete and sheet metal. [Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Company, Central Interim Storage Facility for Spent Nuclear Fuel - CLAB, pp. 4-5.] The storage area consists of four water pools lined with stainless steel, with one central pool connected to a transport channel. Each pool can store 1,200 tonnes of nuclear fuel wastes and all handling of storage canisters is done under 8 metres of water. [Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Company, Central Interim Storage Facility, pp. 4-5.] SKB intends to expand the storage facility over the next 10 years to accommodate another rock cavern parallel to the first facility.

Demonstration Disposal

A fundamental principle of the Swedish waste management program is that final disposal of nuclear fuel wastes should proceed in stages, with appropriate checkpoints and opportunities for remedial action throughout. A full-scale demonstration repository would be built before a full-sized permanent facility. The demonstration facility would accommodate 5 to 10 per cent of the fuel inventory to be contained in a full-sized repository. [Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Company, SKB RD&D - Programme: Treatment and Final Disposal of Nuclear Waste, (September 1992), p. 51.] It will use the concept discussed previously for disposing of nuclear fuel wastes. After an extensive trial period (approximately 10 years) and after analyzing the repository, SKB will decide whether to continue the disposal of wastes and to convert the facility into a permanent site, or to retrieve the containers and seek alternative management practices. If SKB retrieves the containers, it could remove the wastes and return them to the CLAB facility.

Site Selection Process and Public Participation

Local municipalities, nuclear agencies and the government must effectively interact in the site selection process if it is to succeed. SKB promotes the participation of local municipal governments and their citizens in the siting process. In addition, municipalities along transportation corridors and in neighbouring areas are included in the consultation process throughout the siting activities.

The siting process is based on physical, safety, technical, social and legal considerations. During the pre-investigation period of the site selection process, feasibility studies are carried out for those municipalities interested in the repository concept. A steering committee consisting of SKB officials and members of the local communities oversees and reviews the pre-siting studies. Four communities are doing pre-siting and feasibility studies. When these investigations are complete, the municipal councils of the participating host sites will hold referenda on whether to continue the siting process or to remove themselves from further consideration. Communities lose their right to veto the process if the government classifies the facility as nationally important or cannot locate another suitable area.

Six phases constitute the Swedish site selection process: pre-study; detailed characterizations; construction and installation of the repository; commissioning of a demonstration facility; operation; and decommissioning. Two sites in Sweden will advance to the detailed characterization phase, but only one will be selected for a final repository. The following is an estimated schedule of activities:

• pre-studies: 1995-2002
• detailed characterizations/construction: 2002-2008
• initial demonstration: 2008-2020
• operation: 2020-2040
• closure/decommissioning: 2040- [Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Company, SKB RD&D - Programme, p. 126.]

On May 15, 1996, the Swedish government appointed a national co-ordinator of nuclear waste disposal. The co-ordinator will gather information and technical studies for municipalities involved in siting, and act as a liaison between municipalities and all other agencies involved in the process. With the government's decision to conduct 5 to 10 feasibility studies in the immediate future, the co-ordinator will establish conditions to ensure that these studies are completed and provide potential "feasibility study" communities with advice and information concerning siting. [National Co-ordinator for Waste Disposal, Work Programme for the National Co-ordinator for Nuclear Fuel Waste Disposal, (M1996:C), p. 4.]

The co-ordinator will also clarify the decision-making process in waste management, give all parties involved an opportunity to participate, and help define the roles of government agencies and municipalities at all stages of the siting process. Finally, the co-ordinator will develop various processes for national consultation on waste management.

To ensure the future success of the program for managing nuclear wastes, the decision-making process must remain transparent and accountable. This new direction in Swedish waste management policy is designed to establish a consistent and stable process for siting a repository. [National Co-ordinator for Waste Disposal, Work Programme, p. 4.]

Alternative Approaches

Deep geological disposal is the primary option that Sweden is currently pursuing. It has also investigated two other viable approaches: centralized interim wet storage and above-ground dry storage. The "zero alternative" involves long-term wet storage of wastes for at least 100 years, possibly at the CLAB facility. Sweden plans to conduct a full safety assessment of this option in the near future. The "secondary to zero" option would place wastes at a centralized dry storage facility. The dry storage option is at the initial stages of development and SKB may perform a full safety assessment at a later date.

Switzerland

Organization

National legislation defines the funding and management of nuclear waste disposal. The utilities and the government have formed the National Co-operative for Storage of Nuclear Waste (NAGRA) to manage and dispose of nuclear wastes. Funding for NAGRA activities is provided by the utilities and placed in a segregated fund. The Ministry of Transportation and Energy oversees the fund.

Primary Concept

Switzerland has a small nuclear program compared to other nations; however, it provides approximately 40 per cent of the country's electricity. [Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, Nuclear Energy Agency, "Update on Waste Management Policies and Programs," Nuclear Waste Bulletin, 11 (June 1996), p. 48.] The Swiss government proposes to manage its nuclear wastes through geological disposal.

The Swiss concept for deep geological disposal consists of a repository located within crystalline plutonic rock or an opalinus clay formation. A repository in crystalline plutonic rock would be located 1000 metres underground. In a clay formation, the vault would be placed at a depth of 850 metres. [National Board For Spent Fuel, Survey of Siting Practices for Selected Management Projects in Seven Countries, Report 60 (June 1992), p. 52.] In either case, the vault will consist of an underground central area at the bottom of two main shafts. A system of parallel repository tunnels will be excavated at the base of vertical shafts and will provide access to horizontal tunnel arrays. Waste canisters will be centrally emplaced in the horizontal tunnel arrays and surrounded by compacted bentonite clay.

Centralized Interim Storage

All high-level vitrified reprocessed wastes will be held in interim storage for approximately 40 years before disposal. The Swiss parliament is considering the centralized interim storage facility. It is expected that construction licences will be granted in the near future, allowing for the commissioning of the facility in 1999. [Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, Nuclear Energy Agency, "Update on Waste Management Policies and Programs," Nuclear Waste Bulletin, 11 (June 1996), p. 49.]

Site Selection and Public Participation

A strictly defined program for site selection and public participation in Switzerland has not been implemented; however, regional investigations of potential sites have been ongoing. A three-phased approach has been developed to select possible host locations. Phase I consists of regional studies of large areas; Phase II entails intensive technical investigations and socio-economic studies of smaller areas; and Phase III provides forin situ and characterization studies with the co-operation of local communities. [C. McCombie, A Phased Strategy Towards Implementation of a Swiss Deep Geologic Repository (paper presented at the International Conference on Deep Geological Disposal of Radioactive Waste, Winnipeg, September 16-19, 1996), p. 35.] During preliminary investigations, a commission will be organized with representatives of the federal government, cantonal governments and locally affected communities, to review and monitor siting activities. Potentially interested host communities will participate voluntarily in the site selection process. These communities can withdraw from the siting process at any stage without penalty. Using this approach, NAGRA hopes to demonstrate the feasibility of siting a repository by the year 2000. [Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, Nuclear Energy Agency, "Update on Waste Management Policies and Programs," Nuclear Waste Bulletin, 11 (June 1996), p. 50.]

United Kingdom

Organization

The United Kingdom's approach to waste management is embodied in a national nuclear policy. Various agencies are involved in waste management, ranging from government departments to the private nuclear industry. The Nuclear Industry Radioactive Waste Executive (NIREX) is jointly owned by waste generators and the national government. NIREX is responsible for developing a management program for intermediate-level radioactive wastes. The producers of the wastes must finance the cost of disposal. There is no segregated fund to cover the costs of managing wastes; however, the Ministry of Environment will oversee the allocation of disposal funds. In addition, the Radioactive Waste Management Advisory Committee (RWMAC) advises the Minister of Environment on major decisions concerning nuclear issues. It is an independent multi-disciplinary body of experts which produces annual reports on nuclear activities.

Primary Concept

NIREX is developing a single deep geological repository to accept reprocessed intermediate-level radioactive wastes over a 50-year operational period. The concept would not rely on monitoring and retrievability to ensure the safety of the system. Clay, granite and salt formations have been studied for suitability. Each vault design is based on the geological medium in which the vault would be situated. The designs are similar to other countries' designs (i.e. the Swedish concept for granite, the German concept for salt and the Belgian concept for clay). Currently, high-level reprocessed vitrified wastes will be stored for 50 to 100 years at Dounreay in a concrete vault-type storage facility.

Site Selection Process and Public Participation

During the 1980s, NIREX limited the selection process for a geological repository to 12 areas. Locations were examined on the basis of environmental and geological data. Precise locations were identified for physical site investigations, and two potentially suitable sites-Dounreay and Sellafield-were selected for initial drilling. After completing a public information and local consultation program in both places, NIREX selected Sellafield as the most promising site to concentrate its investigations.

The government has committed itself to full public consultation for all developments, proposals and licensing applications within the waste management program. Nuclear agencies have attempted to incorporate public interests and concerns into their initiatives.

Like waste management agencies in other countries, NIREX proposed to construct an underground rock laboratory to investigate the geology and hydrology of the Sellafield area. The planning application for the facility was submitted in July 1994. In 1995, the local county council rejected NIREX's application for the laboratory based on incomplete surface investigations and scientific uncertainties in modelling and data. NIREX launched an appeal against the county decision and the matter was placed in the hands of the Secretary of State for the Environment.

A public inquiry was held over 66 days between September 1995 and February 1996 to examine the proposed underground research laboratory. Members of the public who participated in the inquiry felt that NIREX withheld scientific information and evidence that called the feasibility of the site into question, and that such information only became available during the inquiry. In its defence, NIREX said it has always made it publicly known that scientific uncertainties existed and remained to be solved. This was one of the motivations for building an underground research laboratory. NIREX claimed that all scientific information, evidence and reports have always been publicly available and discussed at the inquiry.

The inspector presiding over the public inquiry submitted his report to the Secretary of State and reaffirmed the county council's rejection of the application. The following are some of the issues the inspector considered when deciding on NIREX's appeal: the direct relationship between the proposed research laboratory and an ultimate disposal facility; the lack of examination of alternative sites; potential effects on marine and local environments; violations of local laws, policies and regulations; the fact that the local area was too economically dependent on the nuclear industry; the inadequacy of transportation routes and planned infrastructure; negative effects on local non-human biota and habitats; inconsistent and premature application of siting criteria in the siting process; insufficient knowledge of the hydrogeology and geology of the area; and use of inadequate modelling methodologies and tools.

The Secretary of State supported the inspector's decision to uphold the council's rejection of the planning application. He agreed with most of the inspector's conclusions within the report, but he disputed the direct relationship between the proposed research laboratory and an ultimate disposal facility and the fact that the Sellafield area was too economically dependent on the nuclear industry. NIREX accepted the Secretary of State's decision and did not file an appeal. The company has yet to finalize plans for its waste management program; however, the Secretary of State's decision reaffirmed the national policy of constructing a deep repository for radioactive waste disposal as soon as reasonably practicable, once a suitable site is found.

United States

Organization

The management and disposal strategy for civilian nuclear fuel wastes is contained in national legislation. The Department of Energy, through the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (OCRWM), is responsible for developing and operating geological repositories for civilian wastes and for implementing theNuclear Waste Policy Act. Waste generators contribute to a national segregated fund to cover the costs of the management program. The U.S. Congress oversees the fund.

Primary Concept

The U.S. disposal concept proposes geological burial of wastes, 300 metres underground, in the Yucca Mountain region in Nevada. [John Cantlon, Nuclear Waste Management in the U.S. - The Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board's Perspective, (June 1996), p. 1.] The geology of the site consists of unsaturated welded tuff, a dense form of volcanic ash. The design will resemble that of a large mining complex containing three parallel main horizontal tunnels. These tunnels will contain rooms with boreholes drilled into the floors for waste emplacement; following emplacement of wastes, boreholes and disposal rooms will be backfilled.

By 1998, regulators will decide whether it is feasible to build a repository at the Yucca Mountain site. After the Department of the Environment, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and the public analyze all the scientific investigations, the Secretary of Energy will produce a report. It will determine the feasibility of the site for waste disposal and advise the President whether a licence application should be pursued by 2001. [U.S. Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board, Report to the U.S. Congress and the Secretary of Energy (1996), p. 7.]

Centralized Interim Storage

Long-term above-ground storage for high-level nuclear wastes is becoming an alternative for managing nuclear fuel wastes. By law, the OCRWM will be required to accept nuclear wastes from state utility companies by 1998. [U.S. Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board, Report to the U.S. Congress and the Secretary of Energy (1996), p. vii.] Because there is no alternative site to Yucca Mountain, nor contingency plans if the site proves unsuitable, Congress is considering an interim storage facility for the Yucca Mountain location. This facility would provide temporary dry storage for the wastes until a permanent site was determined. The construction of a federal centralized storage facility would be deferred until a decision on the suitability of Yucca Mountain for a repository is made. If needed, the storage facility would be built and operational by 2010. [U.S. Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board, Report to the U.S. Congress and the Secretary of Energy (1996), p. 48.]

Site Selection Process and Public Participation

Amendments made to the Nuclear Waste Policy Act in 1987 suspended all site investigations throughout the United States and focused all activities at the Yucca Mountain site. There is no formal public participation mechanism in the nuclear management program. Public comment is sought only during the review of the environmental impact statement before a licence is granted for the repository. Ultimately, the NRC makes all decisions concerning the management of nuclear fuel wastes and the disposal site.

Alternative Approaches

With the uncertainty of the Yucca Mountain project at this time, the United States government is preparing alternatives for managing its inventory of nuclear fuel wastes. The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), located in New Mexico, is evaluating the safe disposal of military wastes in salt beds at a depth of 655 metres. [George Dials, The Current Strategy for Safe Management and Disposal of Transuranic Radioactive Waste in the U.S.A . (paper presented at the International Conference on Deep Geological Disposal of Radioactive Waste, Winnipeg, September 16-19, 1996), p.7.] Wastes would be transported to WIPP in shielded casks of carbon steel, then placed in one of the boreholes in the facility's walls and sealed. The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) are currently conducting a review to determine whether the WIPP facility can demonstrate postclosure safety that would meet international standards for disposing of civilian radioactive fuel wastes.

Observations

According to 1995 figures, there are more than 430 operating nuclear power stations in 30 countries. ["Nuclear Power Contributions in 1995", Nuclear News (June 1996): 36.] Plans for permanent geological disposal facilities are not limited to the countries with the most advanced economies; however, these countries have made the greatest investment in research, so their programs were discussed in the earlier part of this appendix. In most cases, published proposals from less wealthy countries in Asia, South America and Eastern Europe involve developing a deep geological disposal site not unlike that proposed by Canada. Some of these countries favour deposition in granite, but most have chosen salt as the preferred medium. The one country that currently favours long-term storage is South Korea.

Demonstration disposal projects and centralized interim storage are two fundamental elements of various national programs for managing wastes. These steps in the waste disposal process make management programs flexible and robust and allow authorities adequate time to make sound decisions.

A demonstration disposal project will ensure that Sweden can implement its waste disposal program in a step-wise manner. In addition, establishing the Central Interim Storage Facility has allowed SKB to reflect on the direction of its disposal program, to incorporate new information obtained from concurrent research and development programs into the final disposal concept, and to consider long-term storage if demonstration disposal proves unsuitable.

For Finland, the Netherlands and Switzerland-countries with relatively small nuclear programs and minimal volumes of wastes-centralized interim storage is an attractive alternative. The storage period for wastes at these facilities is roughly 40 to 100 years. As in Sweden, this management approach allows governments to take more time to make decisions concerning final disposal and even to discuss joint disposal projects with other countries. France has taken an unique approach to waste management by opting to build an underground research facility first and then to determine its feasibility as a geological repository. However, these countries feel there is no urgency to move to deep geological disposal, or even to begin siting investigations. They believe centralized interim storage provides an adequate solution for waste management at least for the intermediate term.

Currently Belgium, Germany and the United States are concentrating exclusively on deep geological disposal. Each is examining only one location for potential repositories. The United States does not have any contingency plans in the event that the Yucca Mountain site is deemed unsuitable for waste disposal. Recently, the U.S. Congress began considering the possibility of building a central interim storage facility at Yucca Mountain. However, the OCRWM continues to advocate final deep geological disposal at Yucca Mountain, even after a period of interim storage.

In the U.K., NIREX's Sellafield experience clearly illustrated the importance of early public involvement in waste management and the siting process. Without two-way communication between the local community of a selected site and the company responsible for managing wastes, irreparable problems can arise. To build confidence in the site selection process and to avoid accusations of "suppressing" information, the nuclear industry must give the public open access to all available information related to managing wastes.

The international scientific community shares research that influences individual national programs, including Canada's. AECL's concept is similar to other countries' initiatives in the field of nuclear waste management. Although different countries use various geological media, the generic characteristics of deep geological disposal of canisters of wastes in a vault are consistent throughout most national programs. The Canadian management program has not been developed in isolation, but in an environment of extensive exchange of information within the international scientific and technical community.

The Canadian waste management program is unique among national programs because an environmental assessment and a public review of deep geological disposal have been conducted at the stage of concept development. The federal government has stated that no site would be selected for a disposal facility until the concept had been approved. The Canadian program is also unusual because there is currently no national legislation assigning technical and fiscal responsibilities for managing and disposing of nuclear fuel wastes.

Table K-2: International Waste Management Programs

Country	Primary Concept for the Long-term Management of Nuclear Fuel Wastes	Unique Characteristics of the Program for Managing Nuclear Fuel Wastes	Plans and Schedules for Siting and Constructing Facilities	Alternative Approaches to Long-term Nuclear Fuel Waste Management
Belgium	Geological medium: deep geological disposal in plastic "Boom" clay Depth: 200-300 m Wastes: high-level vitrified reprocessing wastes and spent fuel rods Vault design: main access galleries with three disposal galleries Emplacement method: vitrified wastes placed parallel in central axis of disposal galleries and spent fuel positioned around it (disposal will be irreversible) Container and lifetime: carbon steel, titanium and nickel alloys with a minimum lifetime of 500 years Buffer: galleries lined with concrete blocks Backfill: compacted bentonite clay or dried Boom clay Sealing: bentonite clay or cement	Centralized interim storage - a building for the interim storage of vitrified reprocessing high-level wastes will be completed at Mol-Dessel - wastes will be stored for a minimum 50-year period	Implementing organization - ONDRAF/NIRAS is a public agency established under legislation to manage and dispose of nuclear wastes - waste producers contribute to a fund managed by ONDRAF to cover the costs of managing wastes Siting process and public participation - the process is based largely on geological factors - there is no formal public participation process - all domestic waste operations are to be centralized under one site, the Mol-Dessel nuclear facility - advantages of the Mol-Dessel site include land availability, presence of multi-disciplinary personnel and laboratories, and an immediate solution for the disposal of reprocessing wastes produced at the site Schedule of activities - detailed study of the facility: 2015 - construction of the underground facility: 2020 - burial of non-vitrified wastes: 2035 - burial of vitrified wastes: 2050 - closure: 2070-2080
Finland	Geological medium: deep geological disposal in crystalline bedrock Depth: 500 m Wastes: spent fuel assemblies Vault design: adapted to bedrock conditions Emplacement method: canisters vertically placed in boreholes in the floors of tunnels Container and lifetime: copper shell (60 mm) with an inner steel container (55 mm) with a lifetime of up to one million years Buffer: bentonite lined with concrete blocks Backfill: bentonite and sand mixture Sealing: bentonite clay	Centralized interim storage - there will be an extended period of interim storage of waste fuel - this allows for pre-processing and direct deep geological disposal	Implementing organization - Posiva Oy is a company jointly owned by two utility companies, TVO and IVO - Posiva Oy is responsible for disposing of and managing nuclear wastes - utilities contribute to a segregated fund overseen by the Ministry of Trade and Industry to cover the costs of managing wastes Site selection process and public participation - the process consists of geological, geophysical, hydrogeological and geochemical studies - there is no formal public review process; however, the landowner and Posiva Oy must agree before siting activities begin - local municipalities are encouraged to participate in open forums and public consultations, and to acquire information in affected communities Schedule of activities - initial site investigations: 1987-1992 (five sites) - detailed site investigations: 1993 (three sites) - final site selection: 2000 - disposing of material: 2020	- seek international aid in management services
France	- national legislation resulting from a review of the waste management program requires the construction of two underground research laboratories - placement of vitrified reprocessed wastes will only occur after a 15-year interim storage period and approval by the French parliament to transform the underground laboratory into a geological repository		Implementing organization - ANDRA, a national government organization, manages radioactive wastes - waste generators are responsible for the disposal costs of vitrified reprocessed wastes - funds will be available when required and will be overseen by the ministries of industry, environment and research Site selection process and public participation - sites for an underground research laboratory are screened on a geological criteria basis - local support in three areas triggered preliminary investigations - in the future, the government will recommend two sites for a research facility - all construction and planning applications have a public consultation and comment period	Geological disposal - the government plans to initiate site analysis for a possible geological repository in various media (granite, clay and salt) - specific details concerning the canister, vault design, vault sealing and waste emplacement have not been fully developed Alternative approaches - under the High-level Waste Act 1992, regulators will research and develop storage in deep geological formations; transmutation; the packaging and process involved in long-term surface storage; and the feasibility of retrievable or non-retrievable disposal in deep geological formations
Germany	Geological medium: deep geological disposal in salt dome (140 m thick) Depth: 840-1200 m Wastes: spent fuel assemblies and vitrified reprocessing wastes Vault design: two exploratory driftways with several connecting drifts Emplacement method: canisters vertically placed in boreholes in the floors of drifts; vitrified wastes placed along drifts Container and lifetime: cast-iron casks for spent fuel; steel containers for vitrified wastes Backfill: salt, cement or excavated rock	Centralized interim storage - high-level wastes will be stored at an interim storage facility at Gorleben for at least 20 years until a final decision is taken on disposal	Implementing organization - the Federal Agency for Radiological Protection (BFS) disposes of and manages nuclear wastes - waste producers and the federal government will supply the funds for managing wastes when required - the Ministry of the Environment would oversee the funds Site selection process and public participation - the process explores the subsurface environment to acquire information to evaluate safety of a repository - geological criteria are used initially in the selection process, and suitable sites are evaluated for health, environmental and socio-economic impacts - the project requires a "planned-approval licence for repository" - the governing licensing body evaluates and weighs all interests in the project (government, private sector, NGOs and local communities) - the public consultation process is to be completed before a decision is made - there is no formal public review process - only one site in Germany is being considered Schedule of activities - disposal of nuclear wastes: 2020
Nether-lands		Centralized interim storage - all radioactive wastes are to be stored at one location for a period of 50 to 100 years - during this period, the government will choose a more permanent waste management strategy	Implementing organization - the Central Organization for Radioactive Waste (COVRA) manages and disposes of nuclear wastes - this company is a collaborative effort of the waste producers and the government - waste producers fund COVRA's activities Site selection process and public participation - the siting process includes issuing local and regional permits before actual field investigations - the public can comment on licence applications for field investigations, but there is no formal public review process Schedule of activities - application for permit to construct high-level waste storage facility: 1996	Geological disposal - retrievable deep geological disposal in various geological media was considered - it would have used a conventional mine layout - vitrified reprocessing wastes would have been emplaced - canisters would have been vertically placed in boreholes, in floors of tunnels Alternative approaches - research continues into other geological media for retrievable disposal - research continues into transmutation and long-term surface storage of wastes
Sweden	Geological medium: deep geological disposal in crystalline rock Depth: approximately 500 m Wastes: spent fuel assemblies Vault design: main tunnel interconnected to parallel tunnels Emplacement method: vertically in boreholes in floors of tunnels Container and lifetime: copper shell (50 mm); cast steel inner composite (50 mm) filled with quartz sand, lead shot or glass beads; and a lifetime of up to one million years Buffer: bentonite clay Backfill: compacted bentonite clay Sealing: bentonite plugs	Centralized interim storage - spent fuel is currently stored at the Central Interim Storage Facility (CLAB) for at least 40 years following removal from nuclear reactors - CLAB is located in a rock cavern 30 m underground - CLAB contains four stainless steel-lined storage pools, with one central pool connected to a transport channel - expansion is planned over the next 10 years Demonstration disposal - a demonstration repository (5-10% of a regular facility) is to be built before a full-sized repository - after a trial period, regulators will decide whether the deposited wastes will be retrieved for alternative treatment or returned to CLAB, or whether the facility will be converted into a permanent site	Implementing organization - nuclear power companies have formed a jointly owned company, SKB, to dispose of and manage nuclear wastes - utilities contribute to a segregated fund controlled and overseen by the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources to cover the costs of managing wastes Siting process and public participation - the process is based on physical, safety, technical, social and legal considerations - it includes municipal government and all affected communities (including those along the transportation route and neighbouring communities) - four sites are in various stages of the process, such as pre-studies and feasibility studies - a steering committee of SKB officials and members of the local community oversees the siting studies - upon completion of the initial pre-studies, the municipal council of the potential host site will hold a referendum on whether to continue the siting process - communities lose their right to veto the process if the facility cannot be situated in another area and if the facility is classified as nationally important - detailed characterizations of two sites will be done and a final site chosen by the year 2002 Schedule of activities - siting: 1995-2002 - detailed characterization and construction: 2002-2008 - demonstration operation: 2008-2020 - operation: 2020-2040 - closure and decommissioning: 2040-	"Zero alternative" - this would entail long-term interim wet storage that would be prolonged for at least 100 years, possibly at the CLAB facility - a full safety assessment is planned for this option "Secondary to zero option" - this would entail dry storage at a designated facility - it is currently in the initial stages of development - the SKB may perform a full safety assessment in the future
Switzer-land	Geological media: deep geological disposal in crystalline or sedimentary rocks (Opalinus clay) Depth: 1000 m in crystalline rock; 850 m in Opalinus clay Wastes: vitrified reprocessing wastes Vault design: underground central area with parallel tunnels Emplacement method: canisters horizontally placed in tunnel arrays Container and lifetime: self-supported cast carbon steel shell (25 cm) with a minimum lifetime of 1000 years Buffer: bentonite Backfill: bentonite blocks, or bentonite and sand mixture	Centralized interim storage - vitrified reprocessing wastes are to be held in interim storage for approximately 40 years before disposal - specific projects are under way to provide the required intermediate facilities	Implementing organization - the utilities have jointly formed the National Co-operative for Storage of Nuclear Waste (NAGRA) to manage and dispose of nuclear wastes - waste producers contribute to a segregated fund overseen by the Ministry of Transportation and Energy to cover the costs of managing wastes Site selection and public participation - a strictly defined program has not been established - regional investigations of potential sites have been ongoing using a three-phase approach (regional studies, intensive technical and socio-economic studies of smaller areas, in situstudies with local community participation) - during preliminary investigation, a commission is set up with representatives from government, canton governments and locally affected communities to review and monitor activities - the process is voluntary and allows communities to withdraw from the siting process at any stage Schedule of activities - centralized intermediate storage facility application: 1995 - construction licences: 1996 - commissioning of the facility: 1999 - demonstration of the feasibility of siting: 2000
United Kingdom	Geological media: clay, granite and salt Wastes: intermediate-level vitrified reprocessing wastes Vault design: based on Belgian concept for clay, Swedish concept for granite and German concept for salt		Implementing organization - the Nuclear Industry Radioactive Waste Executive (NIREX), jointly owned by waste generators and the national government, is responsible for developing a management program for intermediate-level radioactive wastes - waste generators are responsible for financing the costs of disposal - there is no segregated fund to cover costs; the funds will be made available when necessary and the Ministry of the Environment will oversee their allocation Site selection and public participation - during the 1980s, NIREX limited the site selection process to two sites, Dounreay and Sellafield - Sellafield was chosen as the most promising site to concentrate research investigations - in 1994, NIREX submitted a planning application to build a underground rock laboratory to conduct research in the Sellafield area - in 1995, the local county council rejected the proposal and NIREX appealed the decision before the Secretary of State for the Environment - a public inquiry into this issue was held over a six-month period from 1995 to early 1996 - a report was submitted to the Secretary of State reaffirming the county's decision to reject the proposal - the Secretary of State supported the report's recommendations and NIREX accepted the decision Schedule of activities - in 1997, the Secretary of State for the Environment reaffirmed the national policy to construct a deep repository for intermediate-level radioactive waste disposal as soon as reasonably practicable once a suitable site is found
United States	Geological medium: geological disposal in porous and non-porous tuff (dense volcanic ash) Depth: 300 m Wastes: vitrified reprocessing wastes and spent fuel Vault design: mining configuration with three parallel horizontal tunnels Emplacement method: canisters vertically placed in boreholes in the floors of rooms Container and lifetime: no decision (titanium, copper/iron, stainless steel and nickel materials are being investigated) Backfill: no decision (cement mixtures, solid and liquid metal, and glass are being investigated)		Implementing organization - the Department of Energy includes the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (OCRWM), which manages and disposes of civilian nuclear fuel wastes - waste generators contribute to a national segregated fund to cover the costs of the management program - the U.S. Congress oversees the fund Site selection process and public participation - no alternative site or contingency plans exist in the event the site is found to be unsuitable - there is no formal public participation mechanism - states, Aboriginal communities and other stakeholders provide input into the process but have no authority in decision-making Schedule of activities - regulators will continue to build the Exploratory Studies Facility - termination of investigations on multi-purpose canisters, transport canisters and generic transportation work: 1996 - completion of the U-shaped tunnel loop and two access tunnels from the main loop to a fault zone: 1997 - a decision on the viability of the Yucca Mountain site: 1998 - disposal of wastes at Yucca Mountain, if the site is suitable: 2010-	Storage facility at Yucca Mountain - Congress will make a decision by 1998 - site would include a centralized storage and transport system Long-term above-ground storage and centralized monitored retrievable storage (surface and subsurface) - a monitored facility with retrievable storage could prepare spent fuel for transport to a permanent repository Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) - the plant is located in New Mexico - it is evaluating the safe disposal of military radioactive wastes in salt beds at a depth of 655 m - wastes would be transported to WIPP in shielded casks of carbon steel, placed in one of the boreholes in the facility's walls and sealed - an OECD/NEA review to determine if the WIPP facility could demonstrate postclosure safety is currently underway