Third Update on Environmental Remediation of Historic LLR Waste Sites in Canada (1997-2003)

2003 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. L. Zelmer ◽  
G. G. Case
Keyword(s):  
Waste Management ◽  
Federal Government ◽  
Environmental Remediation ◽  
Environmental Benefits ◽  
Low Level ◽  
Federal Department ◽  
Structures And Properties ◽  
Priority Direction ◽  
Interim Storage

Canada’s Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Office (LLRWMO) continues to make significant progress toward the remediation of orphan sites contaminated with historic Low Level Radioactive (LLR) waste. Since its establishment in 1982, the LLRWMO, which is operated by Atomic Energy of Canada Limited, has acted as the agent of the federal government in this area, taking policy and priority direction from the federal department of Natural Resources Canada. The LLRWMO has investigated and decontaminated structures and properties at many sites across the country. It has removed contaminated soil, debris and radioactive artifacts to interim storage or interim, in situ containment. It has worked with communities and regulatory agencies to develop locally acceptable waste management solutions for the short- and long-term. This paper provides an update on the progress of environmental remediation programs and projects of the LLRWMO made since the last reporting at the Sixth ICEM Conference in Singapore in 1997. Emphasis is placed upon the areas of sustained interim waste management and community problem solving in this period. In addition, comment is provided on the future of the program. On behalf of the federal government, the LLRWMO was appointed in 2000 July to act as the proponent for the Port Hope Area Initiative (PHAI), a ten-year $260 M undertaking that will see historic LLR wastes currently found in various community locations consolidated into safe, long-term management facilities, yielding environmental benefits for present and future generations. This activity is breaking new ground in the implementation of community recommended solutions and signals the way forward in Canada’s historic waste program.

Port Hope Area Initiative

2003 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Brown ◽  
David McCauley
Keyword(s):  
Waste Management ◽  
Federal Government ◽  
Environmental Remediation ◽  
Local Community ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Local Participation ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Government ◽  
Term Management

The Port Hope Area Initiative involves a process that will lead to the cleanup of low-level radioactive wastes in two communities in Southern Ontario and the construction of three new long-term waste management facilities in those communities. The history of the Initiative provides important insights into local participation and the successes and failures of siting efforts. The wastes resulted from the operations of an industrial process in Port Hope that began in the 1930s. Initially, wastes (contaminated with radium, uranium, and arsenic) from radium processing were deposited in a relatively uncontrolled manner at various locations within the town. By the 1940s, uranium processing wastes were deposited at nearby purpose-built radioactive waste management facilities. The problem of contamination was first recognized in 1974 and the worst cases quickly cleaned up. However, large volumes of contamination remained in the community. There were three successive efforts to develop an approach to deal with the area’s contamination. In the early to mid 1980s, a standard approach was employed; i.e. indentifying the most technically appropriate local site for a disposal facility, proceeding to evaluate that site, and communicating the benefits of the chosen approach to the local community. That approach was resoundingly rejected by local citizens and government representatives. The second effort, an innovative and consultative voluntary siting effort carried out during the late-1980s and early to mid-1990s involved the solicitation of other municipalities to volunteer to host a facility for the disposal of the Port Hope areas wastes. That effort resulted in the identification of a single volunteer community. However, negotiations between the federal government and the municipality were unable to reach an acceptable agreement establishing the conditions for the community to host the waste management facility. The third effort, a community-driven approach, was undertaken in the late-1990s and resulted in an agreement in 2001 between the Government of Canada and the local communities that sets in motion a process for the cleanup of the local wastes and long-term management in new local waste management facilities. This paper provides insights into the history of the problem, the efforts of the federal government over the last two decades to deal with the issue, how local participation and decision-making processes affected the successes of the various siting approaches, and lessons learned that might be of interest to others who must deal with environmental remediation situations that involve siting long-term management facilities.

Management of Institutional Radioactive Waste in Lithuania

2003 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Poskas ◽  
J. E. Adomaitis ◽  
R. Kilda
Keyword(s):  
Radioactive Waste ◽  
Waste Management ◽  
Former Soviet Union ◽  
Effective Control ◽  
Surface Barrier ◽  
Radioactive Waste Management ◽  
Near Surface ◽  
Interim Storage ◽  
Storage Facilities

The growing number of radionuclide applications in Lithuania is mirrored by increasing demands for efficient management of the associated radioactive waste. For the effective control of radioactive sources a national authorization system based on the international requirements and recommendations was introduced, which also includes keeping and maintaining the State Register of Sources of lonising Radiation and Occupational Exposure. The principal aim of the Lithuania’s Radioactive Waste Management Agency is to manage and dispose all radioactive waste transferred to it. Radioactive waste generated during the use of sources in non-power applications are managed according to the basic radioactive waste management principles and requirements set out in the Lithuanian legislation and regulations. The spent sealed sources and other institutional waste are transported to the storage facilities at Ignalina NPP. About 35,000 spent sealed sources in about 500 packages are expected until year 2010 at Ignalina NPP storage facilities. The existing disposal facility for radioactive waste from research, medicine and industry at Maisiagala was built in the early 1960’s according to a concept typical of those applied in the former Soviet Union at that time. SKB (Sweden) with participation of Lithuanian Energy Institute has performed assessment of the long-term safety of the existing facility. It was shown that the existing facility does not provide safe long-term storage of the waste already disposed in the facility. Two alternatives were defined to remedy the situation. A first alternative is the construction of a surface barrier and a second one is a retrieval solution, whereby the already stored waste will be retrieved for conditioning, characterisation and interim storage at Ignalina NPP. Facilities for the processing of the institutional radioactive waste are required before submittal to Ignalina NPP for storage, since the present facilities are inadequate. Feasibility study to establish a new central facility has been performed by SKB International Consultants (Sweden) with participation of Lithuanian Energy Institute. This study has identified the process applied and equipment needed for a new facility. Reference design and Preliminary Safety Assessment have also been performed. Plans for the interim storage and disposal of the institutional waste are described in the paper. The aspects of finging safe disposal solutions for spent sealed sources in a near surface repositories are also discussed.

Conditioning of Plutonium Waste for Long-Term Interim Storage

2001 ◽  
Author(s):  
F.-W. Ledebrink ◽  
P. Faber
Keyword(s):  
Radioactive Waste ◽  
Federal Government ◽  
Storage Facility ◽  
Acceptance Criteria ◽  
Mox Fuel ◽  
Fuel Fabrication ◽  
Interim Storage ◽  
Waste Drums ◽  
Storage Facilities

Abstract In the period since Germany’s experimental final repository ASSE was closed in 1978, around 5000 drums of conditioned plutonium-bearing radioactive waste from mixed-oxide (MOX) fuel fabrication have accumulated in the interim storage facilities of Siemens AG’s MOX fuel fabrication plant in Hanau, Germany — formerly ALKEM GmbH, now Siemens Decommissioning Projects (Siemens DP). Another 5000 drums will arise in the course of decommissioning and dismantling the MOX plant which has now been underway for some months. Hopes that a final waste repository would soon be able to go into operation in Germany have remained unfulfilled over the last 20 years. Also, the agreements reached between Germany’s electric utilities and the Federal Government regarding the future of nuclear energy have not led to any further progress in connection with the issue of radwaste disposal. A concrete date for a final repository to start operation has still not been set. The German Federal Government estimates that a geologic repository will not be needed for at least another 30 years. Since the opening of a final storage facility is not foreseeable in the near term, Siemens is taking the necessary steps to enable radwaste to be safely stored in aboveground interim storage facilities for a prolonged period of time. Conditioning of radwaste from MOX fuel fabrication by cementing it in drums was started in 1984 in the belief — which was justified at that time — that final storage at the Konrad mine would be possible as of 1995. The quality requirements specified for the waste drums were therefore based on the Konrad acceptance criteria. The operating license for the storage facilities at Hanau at which these drums are presently in interim storage is limited to 20 years and will be expiring in 2004. The drums have not suffered any corrosion to date and, according to past experience, are not expected to do so in the future. However, permission to keep the drums in interim storage for a longer period of time in their current form would be extremely difficult to obtain as their corrosion resistance would have to be demonstrated for a further 30 years. The present goal is therefore to create a waste form suitable for interim storage which needs no maintenance over a long-term period, incorporates state-of-the-art technology and will probably not require any further treatment of the waste packages prior to emplacement in a final storage facility. At the same time, the highest possible degree of safety must be assured for the time during which the waste remains in interim storage. This goal can be attained by conditioning the drums such that they satisfy the requirements currently specified for final storage at the Konrad repository (1). In practice, this means immobilizing the cemented waste drums in concrete inside steel “Konrad Containers” (KCs). The KCs themselves and the concrete backfill represent two further barriers which not only serve as radiation shielding but also protect the drums against corrosion as well as any possible release of radioactive materials in the event of accidents occurring during interim storage. As the KCs are cuboid in shape, they can be stacked in space-saving configurations and are thus particularly suitable for interim storage. Also, due to their extremely heavy weight, theft of the waste packages can be practically ruled out. Despite the fact that the agreements with the German Federal Government have failed to bring opening of the Konrad repository within reach, it is nevertheless a good idea today to condition radwaste in a manner that renders it suitable for ultimate storage there. The agreements between the Government and the utilities are expected at least to result in a land use permit being issued for the Konrad mine before the end of 2001. At present there are no facts known that could cause the safety of this facility to be questioned. Only recently, Germany’s International Nuclear Technology Commission (ILK) confirmed Konrad’s suitability and demanded that it be placed in operation without further delay (2). Even if its operation should, in fact, be blocked by political lobbies, potential legal action or economic considerations, the alternative repository at Gorleben could possibly become operable in approximately 30 years’ time. Gorleben was planned right from the start to be able to accommodate waste packages based on the Konrad acceptance criteria. This means that any waste packages designed for storage at Konrad could likewise be handled and stored at Gorleben. The processes used by Siemens for conditioning of radwaste conform to the recommendations of the “Guidelines for the Control of radioactive Waste with negligible Heat Generation” issued by the German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (BMU) in 1989 (3).

Development of Joint Regulatory Guidance on the Management of Higher Activity Radioactive Wastes on Nuclear Licensed Sites

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mick Bacon ◽  
Doug Ilett ◽  
Andy Whittall
Keyword(s):  
Radioactive Waste ◽  
Waste Management ◽  
Health And Safety ◽  
Radioactive Wastes ◽  
Dissemination And Implementation ◽  
Radioactive Waste Management ◽  
Near Surface ◽  
Better Regulation ◽  
Interim Storage

In 2006 the UK Governments response to recommendations by its Committee on Radioactive Waste Management (CoRWM) established, in England and Wales, that geological disposal, supported by safe and secure interim storage, is the preferred route for the long-term management of higher-activity radioactive waste (i.e. that which is not suitable for near-surface disposal). It also gave the responsibility for delivering the programme for a deep geological repository to the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA). The Scottish Government has a policy of long term, near site, near surface safe and secure interim storage. To support the open and transparent approach promised by Government, the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), the Environment Agency and the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) are developing joint guidance on the management of higher-activity radioactive waste to explain regulatory objectives in securing safe and secure interim storage and the associated management of radioactive wastes. The guidance comes in two parts: • Guidance on the regulatory process; • Technical guidance modules. The guidance promotes a cradle to grave approach to radioactive waste management and by aligning the regulatory interests of environmental and safety regulators it delivers one of the Government’s “Better Regulation” objectives. This paper describes the process by which the joint guidance was produced with particular emphasis on stakeholder engagement. It describes the key features of the guidance, including the concept of the radioactive waste management case (RWMC). Finally the problems encountered with dissemination and implementation are discussed together with measures taken by the regulators to improve these aspects.

Comparative Experiences in Environmental Remediation of LLR Waste Sites in Diverse Canadian Environments

2003 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. G. Case ◽  
R. L. Zelmer
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Remediation ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Provincial Government ◽  
Southern Ontario ◽  
Low Level ◽  
Long Term Storage ◽  
Processing Wastes ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Interim Storage ◽  
Northern Alberta

A variety of sites contaminated with legacy low-level radioactive (LLR) waste materials have been identified across Canada. Many of these sites, associated with former radium and uranium refining and processing operations, are located in urbanized areas of southern Ontario. However, other sites have been discovered at more remote locations in Canada, including northern Alberta and the Northwest Territories. The diversity of waste froms, ranging from pitchblende ore and processing wastes, to discarded luminescent products, combined with construction and transportation logistical issues encountered at these sites, present ongoing challenges for the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Office (LLRWMO) to overcome in meeting its mandate to resolve these legacy problems. Since its establishment in 1982, the federal government’s LLRWMO has operated programs to characterize and delineate contaminated historic waste sites across Canada. These programs have included undertaking property decontaminations, waste consolidation and interim storage projects at many sites, and participating with federal and provincial government departments and local communities to consider long-term storage and disposal opportunities. This paper compares four specific environmental remediation programs conducted by the LLRWMO within diverse Canadian settings found at Port Hope and Toronto (southern Ontario), Fort McMurray (northern Alberta), and Vancouver (west coast of British Columbia). Contaminant characterization and delineation, and remediation plan design and implementation aspects of these individual programs span the time period from the early 1980s through to 2002. The individual programs dealt with a variety of legacy waste forms that contained natural radioactive materials such as radium-226, total uranium, total thorium and thorium-230, as well as coincidental inorganic contaminants including arsenic, barium, cadmium, cobalt, lead, mercury, vanadium and zinc. Application of the lessons learned during these individual programs, as well as the development of new and innovative technologies to meet the specific needs of these programs, have enabled the LLRWMO to effectively and efficiently implement environmental remediation solutions that address the variety of Canada’s legacy LLR wastes.introduction.

Long-Term Issues for Indefinite Surface Storage of Intermediate and Some Low Level Radioactive Waste in the UK

2003 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samantha King
Keyword(s):  
Radioactive Waste ◽  
Waste Management ◽  
Radioactive Wastes ◽  
Management Option ◽  
Radioactive Waste Management ◽  
Scoping Study ◽  
Low Level ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Term Management

Nirex is the organisation responsible for long-term radioactive waste management in the UK. Our mission is to provide the UK with safe, environmentally sound and publicly acceptable options for the long-term management of radioactive materials. Nirex is therefore researching various options for the long-term management of radioactive wastes/materials in order to identify the relevant issues with regard to the feasibility of options, and the research, development and stakeholder dialogue necessary to address these issues. The UK policy for the long-term management of solid radioactive waste is currently undergoing review. In September 2001, the UK Government Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) and the Devolved Administrations for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland launched a public consultation on ‘Managing Radioactive Waste Safely’ (MRWS) [1]. The aim of this consultation was to start a process that will ultimately lead to the implementation of a publicly acceptable radioactive waste management policy. The MRWS programme of action proposed by Government includes a “stakeholder” programme of public debate backed by research to examine the different radioactive waste management options, and to recommend the preferred option, or combination of options. The options of storage above ground and underground are expected to be among the options examined. In the UK, radioactive wastes are currently held in surface stores, at over 30 locations in the UK, pending a decision on their long-term management. These stores were originally designed to have lifetimes of up to 50 years, but due to uncertainty regarding the longer term management of such wastes, extending the life of stores to 100 years is now being considered. This paper describes a preliminary scoping study to identify the long-term issues associated with surface storage of intermediate-level radioactive waste (ILW), and certain low-level waste (LLW) indefinitely in the UK. These wastes contain radionuclides with half lives that can range up to a million years or more, it was therefore assumed, for the purposes of this scoping study, that wastes would need to be managed over a period of at least one million years. An indefinite surface storage concept will require institutional stability and encompasses the principle of guardianship. It is based on a rolling present where each generation is required to monitor and, as necessary, repackage the waste and refurbish/replace storage buildings over a period of at least one million years. Each generation will also need to decide whether to continue with surface storage or implement another long-term management option. The aims of the scoping study were to: i) Investigate the implications of indefinite surface storage of waste packages through consideration of the facility specification, design and assessment. This framework is common to all Nirex radioactive waste management option studies, and provides a common basis for comparison. ii) Identify the social and ethical issues related to indefinite storage, including the principles and values that some stakeholders believe are met by the surface storage option.

Planning for the Recreational End Use of a Future LLR Waste Mound in Canada: Leaving an Honourable Legacy

2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. R. Kleb ◽  
R. L. Zelmer
Keyword(s):  
Waste Management ◽  
Landscape Planning ◽  
Health And Safety ◽  
Host Community ◽  
Low Level ◽  
Long Term Storage ◽  
The Government ◽  
Government Of Canada ◽  
End Use

The Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Office was established in 1982 to carry out the federal government’s responsibilities for low-level radioactive (LLR) waste management in Canada. In this capacity, the Office operates programs to characterize, delineate, decontaminate and consolidate historic LLR waste for interim and long-term storage. The Office is currently the proponent of the Port Hope Area Initiative; a program directed at the development and implementation of a safe, local long-term management solution for historic LLR waste in the Port Hope area. A legal agreement between the Government of Canada and the host community provides the framework for the implementation of the Port Hope Project. Specifically, the agreement requires that the surface of the long-term LLR waste management facility be “conducive to passive and active recreational uses such as soccer fields and baseball diamonds.” However, there are currently no examples of licensed LLR waste management facilities in Canada that permit recreational use. Such an end use presents challenges with respect to engineering and design, health and safety and landscape planning. This paper presents the cover system design, the environmental effects assessment and the landscape planning processes that were undertaken in support of the recreational end use of the Port Hope long-term LLR waste management facility.

DEVELOPMENT OF VERY LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE SEQUESTRATION PROCESS CRITERIA

2015 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 119-123
Author(s):  
Nicholas Chan ◽  
Pierre Wong
Keyword(s):  
Radioactive Waste ◽  
Waste Management ◽  
Low Cost ◽  
Regulatory Control ◽  
Environmental Footprint ◽  
Near Surface ◽  
Low Level ◽  
High Degree ◽  
Low Level Radioactive Waste

Segregating radioactive waste at the source and reclassifying radioactive waste to lower waste classes are the key activities to reduce the environmental footprint and long-term liability. In the Canadian Standards Association’s radioactive waste classification system, there are 2 sub-classes within low-level radioactive waste: very short-lived radioactive waste and very low-level radioactive waste (VLLW). VLLW has a low hazard potential but is above the Canadian unconditional clearance criteria as set out in Schedule 2 of Nuclear Substances and Devices Regulations. Long-term waste management facilities for VLLW do not require a high degree of containment and isolation. In general, a relatively low-cost near-surface facility with limited regulatory control is suitable for VLLW. At Canadian Nuclear Laboratories’ Chalk River Laboratories site an initiative, VLLW Sequestration, was implemented in 2013 to set aside potential VLLW for temporary storage and to be later dispositioned in the planned VLLW facility. As of May 2015, a total of 236 m3 resulting in approximately $1.1 million in total savings have been sequestered. One of the main hurdles in implementing VLLW Sequestration is the development of process criteria. Waste Acceptance Criteria (WAC) are used as a guide or as requirements for determining whether waste is accepted by the waste management facility. Establishment of the process criteria ensures that segregated waste materials have a high likelihood to meet the VLLW WAC and be accepted into the planned VLLW facility. This paper outlines the challenges and various factors which were considered in the development of interim process criteria.

BPEO/BPM in Recycling of Low Level Waste Metal in the UK

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Dodd ◽  
Joe Robinson ◽  
Maria Lindberg
Keyword(s):  
Waste Management ◽  
Nuclear Industry ◽  
Environmental Benefits ◽  
Management Decision ◽  
Low Level ◽  
Metal Waste ◽  
Management Decision Making ◽  
Metals Recycling ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Case Basis

Best Practicable Environmental Option (BPEO) and Best Practicable Means (BPM) are concepts well established in the nuclear industry to help guide and inform waste management decision making. The recycling of contaminated metal waste in the UK is not well established, with the majority of waste disposed of at the Low Level Waste Repository (LLWR) at Drigg. This paper presents an overview of the Strategic BPEO study completed by Studsvik examining the options for low level metal waste management and a subsequent BPM study completed in support of a proposed metals recycling service. The environmental benefits of recycling metals overseas is further examined through the application of lifecycle analysis to the metals recycling process. The methodologies used for both studies are discussed and the findings of these studies presented. These indicate that recycling contaminated metal is the preferred option, using overseas facilities until UK facilities are available. The BPM for metals recycling is discussed in detail and indicates that a tool box for processing metal waste is required to ensure BPM is applied on a case by case basis. This is supported by effective management of waste transport and waste acceptance criteria. Whilst the transport of contaminated metal overseas for treatment adds to the environmental burden of metals recycling, this when compared with the production of virgin metal, is shown to remain beneficial. The results of the Studsvik studies demonstrate the benefits of recycling metals, the options available for such a service and challenges that remain.

Remediating While Preserving Wetland Habitat at an LLR Waste Site in Canada

2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. R. Kleb ◽  
R. L. Zelmer
Keyword(s):  
Waste Management ◽  
Local Community ◽  
Coastal Marsh ◽  
Contaminated Sediment ◽  
Low Level ◽  
Ecological Land Classification ◽  
Long Term Storage ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
Local Community Member

The Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Office was established in 1982 to carry out the federal government’s responsibilities for low-level radioactive (LLR) waste management in Canada. The Office operates programs to characterize, delineate, decontaminate and consolidate historic LLR waste for interim and long-term storage. In this capacity, the Office is currently considering the remediation of 9,000 cubic metres of contaminated sediment in a coastal marsh in the context of a major remediation project involving multiple urban sites. The marsh is situated between the Lake Ontario shoreline and the urban fringe of the Town of Port Hope. The marsh is designated a Cattail Mineral Shallow Marsh under the Ecological Land Classification system for Southern Ontario and was recently named the A.K. Sculthorpe Marsh in memory of a local community member. The marsh remediation will therefore require trade offs between the disruption of a sensitive wetland and the removal of contaminated sediment. This paper discusses the issues and trade-offs relating to the waste characterization, environmental assessment and regulatory findings and thus the remediation objectives for the marsh. Considerations include the spatial distribution of contaminated sediment, the bioavailability of contaminants, the current condition of the wetland and the predicted effects of remediation. Also considered is the significance of the wetland from provincial and municipal regulatory perspectives and the resulting directives for marsh remediation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document