This document discusses radioactive waste management and disposal. It begins by classifying radioactive waste into high level waste, spent nuclear fuel, transuranic waste, mill tailings, and low level waste. It then provides details on the quantities, sources, and current locations of these different waste types. The document outlines principles of radioactive waste management and responsibilities. It examines disposal options for high level waste, low level waste, and transuranic waste, highlighting the hazards of different disposal methods. Regulations governing waste management from the US Congress are also summarized. International approaches to handling radioactive waste are briefly described.
2. I. Radioactive Waste
A. Classification &
Characteristics of
Radioactive Waste
B. Quantities of Waste
C. Sources of Waste
D. Current Location
Jump to first
page
4. I. Radioactive Waste
A.
CLASSIFICATION &
CHARACTERISTICS OF
RADIOACTIVE WASTE
CLASS
DEFINITION
CHARACTERISTICS
High Level Waste
(HLW)
fission and activation
products resulting from
reprocessing of spent
fuel
high heat,
high γ activity,
fairly short t H
SPENT FUEL (SF)
non-reprocessed spent
fuel
high heat,
high γ activity,
α emitters;
fairly short t H for γ,
long t H for α
Transuranic (TRU)
Z > 92
t H > 20 yr
Act. > 100 nCi/g
low heat,
α emitters,
long t H
Mill tailings
residue of U mills
natural radioactivity,
Ra & Rn,
α emitters
Low Level Waste
(LLW)
all else - none of the
above
low heat,
moderate γ activity,
short t H
Defense vs. Commercial waste - depends on the
origin of the waste and the nature of the activity that
created the waste
Jump to first
page
9. B. QUANTITIES OF WASTE
(as of 12-31-96)
TYPE
VOLUME
(m3 )
ACTIVITY
(MCi)
DEPTH ON
FOOTBALL
FIELD (ft.)
HLW - Commercial
2000
23.6
1.6
HLW - Defense
345,350
878
254
SF - Commercial
13,808
30,000
10.3
SF - Defense
1091
n.a.
0.85
TRU - Defense
238,000
2.74
174
LLW - Commercial
1.75 x 10 6
5.1
1286
LLW - Defense
3.39 x 10 6
12.1
2500
Mill Tailings
119 x 10 6
n.a.
87,600
Jump to first
page
10. C.SOURCES OF WASTE
HLW - Defense
Hanford;
Savannah River (SR), SC;
Idaho National Engineering Lab (INEL)
HLW - Commercial
none recently; formerly produced at
West Valley, NY
SF - Defense
none (fuel is reprocessed)
SF - Commercial
Civilian power plants around U.S.
TRU - Defense
Hanford, SR, INEL, Rocky Flats
TRU - Commercial
none
LLW - Defense
Hanford, SR, INEL
LLW - Commercial
power plants, industry, hospitals,
universities around U.S.
Jump to first
page
11. D.CURRENT LOCATION
HLW - Defense
stored at Hanford, SR, INEL;
vitrify and transfer to commercial
repository ~ 2010
HLW - Commercial
West Valley, NY;
vitrify and transfer to commercial
repository ~ 2010
SF - Commercial
stored at pow er plants;
transfer to commercial repository ~ 2010
TRU -
stored at Hanford, SR, INEL, Rocky Flats;
transfer to Waste Isolation Pilot Plant
(WIPP), NM ~ March 1999
Defense
LLW - Defense
Hanford, SR, INEL, Oak Ridge, Los Alamos
LLW - Commercial
2 sites now :
Hanford; Barnwell, SC
In a few years: 2-5 regional sites (?)
Mill Tailings
No operational mills; 6 mills on standby
status.
26 total tailings storage areas in w estern
U.S.
Jump to first
page
12. II. RADIOACTIVE
WASTE
MANAGEMENT
A. Principles
B. Responsibility
C. HLW - Disposal Options
D. HLW Acts - Congress
E. Characteristics of a Good Geologic
Repository
F. Hazards of Deep Geologic Disposal
G.HLW Activity in Other Countries
H. LLW -Disposal Options
I. Hazards of LLW Disposal
J. LLW Acts - Congress
K. LLW Activity in Other Countries
L. TRU Waste Disposal
Jump to first
page
13. II. RADIOACTIVE
WASTE
MANAGEMENT
A. PRINCIPLES
• Time
• Isolation (Distance, Shielding)
B. RESPONSIBILITY
• U.S. Government: HLW, TRU,
Spent Fuel, defense LLW
• States: Commercial LLW
C. HLW -- DISPOSAL OPTIONS
1. Deep geologic repositories
2. Subseabed
3. Space
4. Ice sheet
5. Transmutation
6. Very deep hole
7. Island burial
Jump to first
page
14. D. HLW ACTS -CONGRESS
NUCLEAR WASTE POLICY
ACT OF 1982
NUCLEAR WASTE POLICY
AMENDMENTS ACT OF 1987
Deep geologic disposal chosen
same
2 repositories: 1 in Western U.S.
1 in Eastern U.S.
1 repository:
Fee:
same
1 mill/kWhr
review ed annually
Timetable:
1st repository
begins accepting
w aste by 1998
Yucca Mtn.,
Nevada
fuel acceptance delayed
(to ~2010)
MRS - If Congress says yes
MRS - yes
Financial incentive to states
w ith MRS or repository: None
Financial incentive:
$10 M/yr for MRS
$20 M/yr for repository
DOE designs & builds repository
same
NRC licenses repository
same
EPA sets radioactive release
limits
same
Jump to first
page
15. E. CHARACTERISTICS OF
A GOOD GEOLOGIC
REPOSITORY
Very little (or no) groundwater in
host rock.
Slow water travel time in host rock.
Low seismic activity.
Non-corrosive environment.
High absorptive properties for
radionuclides.
Good heat dissipation
characteristics.
Strong enough to support mining
activity.
Few fractures or cracks.
No commercial interest in host rock.
Isolated area.
Dry climate.
Jump to first
page
16. F. HAZARDS OF DEEP
GEOLOGIC
DISPOSAL
Transportation of HLW or SF to
repository
Shipping casks very important
Release to ground water.
Barriers:
Waste form (glass or ceramic)
Waste canister (metal)
Backfill (host rock/clay)
Host rock
Jump to first
page
17. G. HLW ACTIVITY IN
OTHER COUNTRIES
Reprocess →HLW disposal
Argentina, Belgium, Brazil, China,
France, Germany, India, Italy,
Japan, Netherlands, Spain,
Switzerland, United Kingdom, former
USSR states
No reprocessing →SF disposal
Canada, Sweden, United States
Storage of HLW (vitrified) or SF in
water or dry storage
Investigate geological repositories
Jump to first
page
28. H. LLW -- DISPOSAL
OPTIONS
1. Shallow-land burial.
2. Earth-mounded tumulus.
3. Concrete structures—above
grade & below grade.
4. Deep trenches.
5. Augered shaft.
6. High-integrity container.
7. Hydrofracture.
8. Underground mines & rock
cavities.
Jump to first
page
29. I. HAZARDS OF LLW
DISPOSAL
1.
2.
3.
1. Transportation of LLW
to disposal site.
2. Leakage of LLW via
groundwater.
3. Inadvertent intrusion.
Jump to first
page
30. J. LLW ACTS -CONGRESS
LOW LEVEL WASTE POLICY
ACT OF 1980
LOW LEVEL WASTE POLICY
AMENDMENTS ACT OF 1985
LLW disposal is a state, not
federal responsibility
same
Encouraged states to join
together in regional
compacts to deal w ith LLW
same
By 1-1-86, each state shall
have disposal mechanism in
operation to handle its LLW.
By 7-1-86, non-compact state must
ratify compact or enact legislation
to provide for operation of instate
LLW facility by 1-1-93.
By 1-1-88, compacts or states
must select LLW sites.
By 1-1-90, license application must
be filed for LLW facilities.
By 1-1-93, access to existing LLW
facilities ceases for states outside
of the 3 compacts operating these
sites.
From 1986-1992, existing sites can
charge increasing surcharges to
w aste from outside the compact.
Rebates (25% of surcharge)
returned to states or compacts
meeting above deadlines.
Jump to first
page
31. K. LLW ACTIVITY IN
OTHER COUNTRIES
Very similar to U.S.
Many using shallow-land
burial.
France -- earth-mounded
tumulus.
Canada -- augered shafts.
W. Germany -- underground
mine.
Sweden, Canada, Finland,
Britain -- rock cavities.
Jump to first
page
32. L. TRU WASTE
DISPOSAL
Very similar in most aspects to
HLW disposal.
Repository is selected and
constructed: Waste Isolation Pilot
Plant, near Carlsbad, NM.
Repository is 2150 ft. below
surface in bedded salt.
Test phase of WIPP started in
1994.
Repository began accepting TRU
waste March 1999.
Jump to first
page