1 www.quintessa.org

Opportunities for Managing VLLW in the UK

DISPONET Workshop on Large Volumes of Radioactive Waste

November 2013

James Penfold

2

Presentation

• Background

• Historical perspective, up to the 2000

• Policy and other developments in the mid 2000s

• Developments in the last 5 years that are identifying opportunities for efficient management of large volumes of VLLW

• Policy and strategic information is from Government, NDA and UK sites. Views and interpretation are mine

3

Background

• Large and diverse nuclear industry, since 1940s • A very large amount of LLW will arise from

decommissioning, and aspects of the inventory are quite uncertain

• Wastes are very diverse, in terms of materials and radioactivity content, although construction waste and contaminated ground from decommissioning is a key component

• The volume of LLW is probably > 4 106 m3

• The costs are probably 10 Bn Euro • The timescale is probably 100 y

4

LLW Management Timeline

• 1947 – Nuclear industry born at Sellafield • 1959 – National LLW repository at Drigg • 1960, 1965 – First specific regulations (and “exemption

orders”) : • 1995 – Radioactive waste policy review : • 2005 – NDA established • 2007 – Updated LLW policy • 2008 – First NDA LLW strategic review • 2010 – Updated strategy

5

Historical Practice

Up to the 1990s…

• Most LLW was operational waste and redundant plant

• Almost all wastes consigned to LLWR (or Dounreay)

• The only scope for dealing with large volume VLLW separately was “Exemption Orders”

– Allowed specific types of waste (e.g. NORM) to be disposed without regulatory controls

– Up to about 10 Bq/g for natural radionuclides

– Quite widely used for “VLLW” although not always correctly

• From about 40 y of nuclear activities

– 800,000 m3 LLW in trenches at LLWR (Drigg) , 30,000 m3 of LLW in trenches at Dounreay

6

Key Developments in 1990s

• LLWR and Dounreay trenches closed, LLWR adopts Vault concept

• Deep geological repository planned to accept some LLW but Nirex fails to make the case for a rock laboratory near Sellafield

• Government review of radioactive waste management policy in 1995 – Existing concept of “Controlled Burial” at Landfills of LLW from non-

nuclear industry – Consulted on extending this to nuclear industry to reduce pressure on

LLWR – Concerns from public and stakeholders meant this was not adopted,

and LLW and VLLW from the nuclear industry had to be sent to LLWR (or stored)

• Some very lightly contaminated material could continue to be disposed of by the nuclear industry and others under “Exemption Orders”

7

Key Developments in 2000s

• Increased pace of decommissioning

• Dounreay commences a programme to establish new LLW and VLLW facilities

• Government establishes the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority in 2005 to manage nuclear cleanup

• Government and NDA review policy and strategy seeking to – Optimise – LLWR is limited (700,000m3 extra?)

– Reduce costs – of order 10 Bn Euro

8

Government Policy Review 2007

• Specifically for LLW, builds on 1995 Policy

• Definition of VLLW – High Volume VLLW: 4 Bq/g or 40 Bq/g H-3/C-14

• Emphasised the importance of: – “Optimisation”

– Proximity principle

– Early solutions

• Overturned previous policy on consignment of nuclear industry waste to landfills

• NDA/LLWR responsible for LLW Strategy

9

Strategic Review, 2008

• Key aim was to define the “Baseline” for LLW management

• This could then be used to identify improvements

• Inventory projections developed in detail

• Explored strategies

• Objective of 10% cost savings

• Mainly recommendations – Application of the Waste Management Hierarchy to site-

level strategies

– Encourage volume reduction (sorting, decontamination)

– Diversion of VLLW to landfills and exemption

10

Inventory Forecast, 2008

11

Key development: Waste Management Hierarchy (WMH)

12

Opportunities, 2008

13

Strategic Review 2011

• Development of Integrated Waste Strategy for each NDA site – But variable application of the WMH – Disposal at LLWR still the dominant option

• More detailed inventory data (volumes increased) • But 400,000 m3 recategorised as VLLW and LLW costs

reduced by about 10% • More waste management routes

– Metal treatment facility in Lillihall – Metals melting at Studsvik – 3 landfills have permits for VLLW – Several hazardous waste incinerators – LLWR will take ownership of wastes and arrange suitable

treatment through agreement with regulators

14

Inventory Forecast, 2011

15

Key development: Framework for Optimisation

16

Opportunities, 2011

• National strategy themes – Further improve application of WMH

– Best use of existing assets (LLWR)

– Make use of new waste management routes

• At a site level – Improve knowledge and waste tracking

– Share best practice

– Use of supply chain for metals melting, thermal treatment, etc.

– Improve scope for disposal to landfill

17

Future Opportunities Onsite recycling, reuse or disposal

• Decommissioning rubble remains a key element of the VLLW waste inventory

• Onsite disposal in designated facilities only under consideration at Sellafield and Dounreay

• Winfrith examining option of onsite disposal in existing basements (30,000 m3) – Options will be consulted on in December

– Key “pathfinder” for NDA

– Dialogue with local stakeholders

– Regulatory mechanisms need to be developed

18

Future Opportunities: Reuse in LLWR Capping

• Option currently being examined – Technical assessment of issues including effect on

safety performance

– Needs careful design e.g. to manage lightly contaminated leachate from cap

• Need a lot of material for cap profile, emplaced grdually

• Material is suitable

• Demand profile could fit arisings

• No complicated permitting issues

19

Future Opportunities Reduction, Recycling and Reuse

• Metals treatment

– Berkeley boilers shows scope for metal treatment

– Greater use of Studsvik facility

– Review “case” for facility in UK-based facility

• Recycling of concrete not really explored

– Scope is really only within nuclear industry

– Major construction nuclear projects are coming

– Timing and QA are the major issues

• What about soils?

20

Conclusions

• Up until mid-2000s the presumption was for all VLLW and LLW to go to LLWR (Drigg)

• Since then… – Government opened up possibilities for VLLW in 2007 and NDA

has sought to optimise waste management using the WMH – NDA has incentivised efficient solutions for VLLW – Sites have developed integrated strategies – Regulators have sought to facilitate where they can

• This has reduced costs by 10% and potentially diverted substantial volumes of VLLW from LLWR

• Challenge is now to explore alternative routes • There remain major opportunities for decommissioning

VLLW, in particular on-site disposal and recycling