DOE OSTI2019
In situ decommissioning (ISD) is considered by IAEA as the permanent entombment of a legacy facility in 'a structurally long lived material' (e.g. concrete) and is considered a solution only under 'exceptional circumstances' (e.g. following a severe accident). However, this definition of ISD as 'only' entombment is not universally accepted; the approach has been implemented as a decommissioning approach by the US Dept of Energy in the past decade at the Savannah River Site (P and R reactors)2,3, the Hanford site (U Canyon) and at the Idaho site (CP601, CP640 and CP633). The application of ISD outside of the United States has been much less common for large facilities although its use for underground substructures (e.g. discarded pipelines) is commonplace. Proponents of ISD consider it beneficial since it eliminates the need to remove, package and transport contaminated equipment from a nuclear legacy site to a disposal facility and it maximizes the use of an existing nuclear site footprint by consolidating equipment in one place. ISD is considered to offer major safety benefits to both workers and the public, as well as major cost and schedule benefits to Government. Opponents of the approach cite the fact that, following ISD, the decommissioned facility has effectively become a long-term waste disposal site and that regulations pertaining to long term waste disposal have been circumvented. Given the increasing pressure on environmental cleanup budgets and schedules around the world, countries such as the United Kingdom, Canada and Japan are considering ISD in its various forms as a potential path forward for decommissioning certain facilities in lieu of the more traditional approaches of either deferred decommissioning or immediate decontamination/demolition. To address this emerging area of decommissioning, a Governmental Technical Information Exchange meeting was held in December 2017 at the DOE Savannah River Site in Aiken, SC, to bring together responsible parties from the US Dept of Energy (DOE), Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd (AECL), the UK Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) and the Japanese Atomic Energy Agency (JAEA) and those countries' respective regulatory agencies to share information about respective 'best practices' and challenges with ISD. Representatives from organizations such as IAEA and US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (US NRC) also participated to discuss their organizations' perspectives and position on ISD. Following the meeting, a series of Working Groups were established which have continued the dialogue in three key areas 5; - ISD-Defined: Identify and share case-specific ISD solutions which allows for the full spectrum of needs and which demonstrate that 'entombment' is not the only definition of 'ISD'. - Regulatory - Share and discuss regulatory concerns and challenges with ISD; - Benchmarking - Share information to support informed and transparent decision-making in ISD. This paper discusses the plans for ISD in some of the countries involved in the December meeting and provides an update on the topics being discussed, and progress being made, by the Working Groups that were formed at the meeting. (authors)
12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗