European and other examples of bilateral and multilateral cooperation

in waste management

Wolfgang Kickmaier Arius Association

Switzerland

With input from John Mathieson, NDA

INPRO Dialogue Forum on Global Nuclear Energy Sustainability: Drivers and Impediments for Regional Cooperation on the Way to Sustainable Nuclear Energy Systems

30 July – 3 August 2012, Vienna

Overview International organisations

IAEA AAEA OECD NEA

Multinational collaboration IFNEC - International Framework for Nuclear Energy Co-operation EDRAM - International Association for Environmentally Safe Disposal of Radioactive Materials Arius - Association for International and Regional Underground Storage

European-specific collaboration Club of Agencies 7th Framework Programme R&D Implementing Geological Disposal Technology Platform (IGD-TP) SAPIERR; ERDO

Conclusions

International Organisations

High level strategic advice from the IAEA

IAEA Reports on Multilateral Waste Management Issues

New NE Report

Options for Management of SNF and Radwaste

For Countries Developing

Nuclear Power

(in prep.)

The AAEA A sub-organization of The Arab League; established in 1989

The structure of AAEA is similar to that of IAEA; General Conference, Executive Council

Promotes peaceful application of atomic energy through many activities; training, CRPs, meetings and conferences…..

13 Arab states are members of AAEA

Population: ≈ 340 Million (US ≈ 312 Million; EC ≈ 500 Million)

League Of Arab States (22 Countries) Gulf Countries: UAE KSA Qatar Oman Bahrain Kuwait

African Countries: Algeria Morocco Tunisia Libya Egypt Sudan Somalia Djibouti Comoros Mauritania

Other Arab Countries: Lebanon Syria Jordan Palestine Yemen Iraq In red: AAEA members

AAEA - Types of activities Activities include:

Co-ordinated research projects, experts meetings, scientific visits, training courses, on-job training, workshops, conferences, seminars and expert missions. Contributing in knowledge and technology transfer in nuclear field by providing the universities and colleges with proper curricula. Publishing and translate many books in different fields of nuclear sciences. Publishing a quarterly newsletter.

http://www.aaea.org.tn/en/goals.htm

OECD-NEA

• Radioactive Waste Management Committee: organizes most work in this area – Forum on Stakeholder Confidence (FSC) – Integration Group for the Safety Case (IGSC) – Working Party on Management of Materials from

Decommissioning and Dismantling (WPDD) • Committee on Radioprotection and Public Health (CRPP): also has

relevant activities • see also: Country reports/profiles www.oecd-nea.org/rwm/profiles/

Multinational Collaboration

Participants Observer Organizations Observer Countries 1. Argentina 22. Oman 1. International Atomic 1. Algeria 22. South Africa 2. Armenia 23. Poland Energy Agency (IAEA) 2. Bahrain 23. Spain 3. Australia 24. Romania 2. Generation IV 3. Bangladesh 24. Sweden 4. Bulgaria 25. Russia International Forum (GIF) 4. Belgium 25. Switzerland 5. Canada 26. Senegal 3. Euratom 5. Brazil 26. Tanzania 6. China 27. Slovakia 6. Chile 27. Tunisia 7. Estonia 28. Ukraine 7. Czech Republic 28. Turkey 8. France 29. U.A.E 8. Egypt 29. Uganda 9. Germany 30. U.K. 9. Finland 30. Vietnam 10. Ghana 31. U.S. 10. Georgia 11. Hungary 11. Greece 12. Italy 12. Indonesia 13. Japan 13. Latvia 14. Jordan 14. Malaysia 15. Kazakhstan 15. Mexico 16. Kenya 16. Mongolia 17. Republic of Korea 17. Nigeria 18. Kuwait 18. Philippines 19. Lithuania 19. Qatar 20. Morocco 20. Singapore 21. Netherlands 21. Slovakia

International Framework for Nuclear Energy Cooperation (IFNEC)

IFNEC provides a forum for cooperation among participating states to explore mutually beneficial approaches to ensure the use of nuclear energy

61 Countries and 3

International Organizations

IFNEC - Radioactive Waste Management

Original Gobal Nuclear Enegery partnership (GNEP) renamed to IFNEC in June 2010 The Radioactive Waste Management Subgroup (of IDWG) reinforces the importance of radioactive waste management

Working from a consolidated topic list • Research and Development • Funding and institutional arrangements • Interactions with stakeholders • Safe and secure storage and transport of used fuel and radioactive

waste prior to disposition • Opportunities and constraints for regional and/or shared disposal

facilities • Opportunities for changing how human resources are developed • Will be addressing waste issues for Small Modular Reactors

EDRAM International Association for Environmentally Safe

Disposal of Radioactive Materials

• Discuss strategic questions among implementers to support their individual approaches on policy issues.

• Stimulate coordinated R&D activities, particularly in URLs • Define positions, coordinate actions, in dealing with

international organisations (e.g. OECD, IAEA, EU) • No active project work currently

Arius is a non-profit Association established 2002 in Switzerland to concepts for socially acceptable, international and regional solutions for environmentally safe, secure and economic storage and disposal of long-lived radioactive wastes

Arius has led projects to achieve this mission with the involvement of organisations from many European countries: organisations from the countries below participated in the SAPIERR I or II projects

*governments have nominated representatives to participate in the ERDO-WG

Austria* Belgium Bulgaria* Czech Rep

Estonia Hungary Ireland* Italy*

Latvia Lithuania* Netherlands* Poland*

Romania* Slovakia* Slovenia* Spain

Switzerland UK

ARIUS Association for Regional and International Underground Storage

Currently Arius is also involved in the MENA and the SEA regions

www.arius-world.org

The potential of shared solutions in Europe

The 14 SAPIERR Working Group members

National disposal programme only

No NPP but some waste for deep disposal

No official policy on multinational

??

European-specific collaboration

EU Club of Agencies POSIVA

RAWRA

PURAM

ONDRAF/NIRAS

Nucleco

ARAO

DPRAO/SERAW

AN&DR

ANDRA

ENRESA

NAGRA

SKB

COVRA

NDA

ALARA

BfS & DBE

BAPA

RATA

ZUOP

DECOM

EU Club of Agencies

• Open to any Member State who has created a separate/dedicated WMO – Expanded at each accession of new MS – European Commission (DG Energy – Secretariat) – Plus NAGRA (CH)

• Sharing of experiences within EU context • Interaction with DG ENER and DG Research

– Provides informal advice to EC (e.g. on draft Directives and their implementation)

– And R&D (superseded by IGD-TP) • Meets 2x / year since 1985!

From bilateral to multinational Cooperation

Development of cooperation at the Grimsel Test Site (Nagra)

EU R&D – FP7 2007

The framework programmes are the biggest funder of collaborative projects

• 7th Framework Programme (2007- 2013) of Fission R&D

(287m) • A new programme ‘Horizon 2020’ is in the planning stage

(launch of first calls 2014)

• R&D Activities related to geological disposal (& P&T) • Organisations in EU countries plus others • Good financial leverage of R&D activities – EU co funds • Originally fundamental R&D, now more towards

implementation, hence IGD-TP

http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/euratom-fission/home_en.html

Implementing Geological Disposal Technology Platform

“The mission of the IGD-TP is to be a tool to support confidence-building in the safety and implementation of deep geological disposal solutions.” Involves many EU, WMOs & universities, research institutes etc. within and outside of Europe

www.igdtp.eu / www.snetp.eu/

This image cannot currently be displayed.

Other related EU Collaboration • European Nuclear Safety Regulators Group

www.ensreg.org – Created in 2007 at the decision of the European Commission – Senior officials from the national nuclear safety, radioactive waste safety or radiation

protection regulatory authorities from all 27 Member States – Helping to establish the conditions for continuous improvement and to reach a common

understanding in the areas of nuclear safety and radioactive waste management

• Western European Nuclear Regulator’s Association www.wenra.org

– A network of Chief Regulators of EU countries, Switzerland, and other European countries with observer status (Ukraine, Armenia, Russia ...)

• European Nuclear Energy Forum (http://ec.europa.eu/energy/nuclear/forum/forum_en.htm)

– Founded in 2007, ENEF gathers all relevant stakeholders in the nuclear field

– ENEF is a platform for a broad discussion, free of any taboos, on transparency issues as well as the opportunities and risks of nuclear energy

European Municipalities It’s not just institutions / organisations that collaborate

• Group of European Municipalities with Nuclear Facilities

• GMF commitments are: – Ensuring that European nuclear municipalities take part in the

discussion forums and in the decision making processes – Carrying out projects with the participation of its members in

order to favour their integration in the European Union – Information exchange about the nuclear reality in the European

countries and about municipal experiences – Improving the knowledge about nuclear reality in Europe, its

safety and its future. http://www.gmfeurope.org/web/principal.html

Support Action: Pilot Initiative for

European Regional Repositories (2003 - 2005)

Strategic Action Plan for Implementation of European Regional Repositories (2006 - 2008)

1. technical disposal

solutions

2. programme timescales

3. national & EU legal issues

4. costs

1. organisational structures

2. liabilities

3. economics

4. security issues

5. societal issues

I II

The European SAPIERR and ERDO Projects

Set the framework for ERDO-WG as the next step forward

A Credible Disposal Strategy

“Dual Track”

National Siting Options Multinational Siting Options

Leasing or

Take Back

Regional

Partnerships

Technical Disposal Concept(s) (safe, secure)

Established Financing Mechanisms (conservative, segregated)

Potential Repository Siting Options (the hardest part)

Interim + Long-term Storage (a key component)

ERDO-WG: Mission Statement .......work together to address common challenges of safely managing the long-lived radioactive wastes in our countries.

.......investigate feasibility of establishing a formal, joint European waste management organization.

.......carry out all necessary groundwork to enable establishment of a European Repository Development Organization as a working entity and present a consensus proposal to our governments.

....if sufficiently broad consensus is achieved by our governments or their representatives, ERDO will be established at the end of this process.

ERDO-WG: Status Group was established in 2009

10 countries* nominated representatives; other interested

Terms of references and outreach programme agreed

Key ERDO Documents have been prepared: ERDO Model Constitution (Draft Articles of Incorporation)

ERDO Operational Guidelines

Approach to Repository Siting Guidelines

8 meetings: Brussels, Prague, Vlissingen (2), Rome, Bratislava, Vienna (2)

Submitted proposals to all EU Member States in late 2011

Time to complete its work difficult to predict but closely linked to EU Directive: probably around 18 months (end 2013)?

* Austria, Ireland, Netherlands, Poland, Slovakia, Italy, Lithuania, Romania, Slovenia, Denmark

www.erdo.eu

The Route to a Solution: ERDO-WG ERDO ERO

ERDO

European Repository

Development Organisation

ERDO-WG

Working Group to lay

the foundations

for the ERDO

ERO

European Repository

Organisation

2009 ≈ 2012-13 ≈ 2025

Investigation of Sites Preferred Site: trigger for ERO

Binding host agreements

times uncertain/flexible

European Repository Development Organisation (ERDO): Concept

Basic studies complete - time to move from research to implementation

START SMALL- move forward in adaptive, staged manner 2009/13: Ad-hoc working group (ERDO-WG) to agree organisational framework and project plan and allocate funds 2013/14: earliest establishment of formal ERDO ~2020: Possible conversion to commercial European Repository Organisation (ERO) as project moves towards licensing

Success in Europe may show the way ahead for other world regions such as the Central- and South America, Middle East, Africa and South East Asia

A Multiplicity of Stakeholders

The Partnership

ERDO and the ‘Siting Problem’

...but there is a way forward, modelled on the best international practice being pursued today

“But which country will be the host? ..you will never find a country that is willing to host a repository for other people’s waste”

Finding a repository site Basis: voluntary, interested host communities

Inclusive process, led by ERDO working directly with national team members and local volunteer communities

No national governmental declaration of willingness to be a host is required at the outset

Allows national governments to follow a “dual track” approach: national and regional options

Potential host communities and countries will emerge after a lengthy process of negotiation

Country can withdraw from process at any time up to final siting decision

A host and its neighbours....

NEIGHBOUR could also be:

Community County Region

Country

HOST could be: Community

County Region

Country

...relations with neighbours is a matter of scale - not principle, nor process

Nuclear Engineering International, May 2008

...a bottom-up, volunteer approach from communities

Perceived Negative Interactions & Implications of Co-existence

Host community concern that national GDF will eventually be opened up commercially to other nations

European law may force a NP with an operational GDF to accept waste from another European country

MNPs presented as unethical because they derogate the responsibility of a country to manage its own wastes

Focus on MNPs may distract and slow down NPs at a critical time in their development

Existence of MNPs may allow countries to take a ‘do nothing’ approach to their wastes, in the hope that a solution will be found for them

Public criticism of MNPs can both undermine the MNPs and rebound to affect NPs

….. but

Advantages of Multinational Repositories

Economy of scale

(Earlier) access to safe disposal facilities

Enhanced global nuclear security

Lower environmental impact

Wider choice of geological conditions

Increased technical potential

Existing and potential new nuclear power nations: can the ERDO model be adapted for use in other

regions?

Arius has started a pilot project, supported by US charitable foundations (Hewlett and Sloan Foundations), to explore the potential interest and adaptability of the concept in some of

these regions

Central and South America

N. Africa

Arabian Gulf

S.E. Asia

ERDO

Conclusions National, regional and international organisations, initiatives, associations or projects offer active platforms / networks for all stakeholder groups – it’s never too early to get involved in waste management

ERDO-WG developed a model for a multinational European repository, which could be adopted to other regions; proposals were submitted to EU member states

Related studies underway for MENA and SEA regions

Partnership, transparency, openness and the dual track approach are key essences for a successful implementation

National and multinational repository projects have to go through exactly the same technical and stakeholder steps

International cooperation should never be used as an argument to postpone a decision or to establish a wait and see strategy

The End