FNCA

Forum for Nuclear Cooperation in Asia

FNCA Consolidated Reporton Low Level Radioactive Waste
Repository(Interim Report)

March 2020

Radiation Safety andRadioactive Waste
Management Group,
Forum for Nuclear Cooperationin Asia (FNCA)CONTENTS
PREFACE .......................................................................................................................... i
Framework of Regional Cooperation under FNCA ......................................................... ii
AUSTRALIA-Part I. General Outline of LLW Repository- ............................................................... 1-Part II. Specific Site Safety Assessment of LLW Repository- .................................. 10
BANGLADESH-Part I. General Outline of LLW Repository- ............................................................. 18-Part II. Specific Site Safety Assessment of LLW Repository- .................................. 22
CHINA-Part I. General Outline of LLW Repository- ............................................................. 27-Part II. Specific Site Safety Assessment of LLW Repository- .................................. 35
INDONESIA-Part I. General Outline of LLW Repository- ............................................................. 43-Part II. Specific Site Safety Assessment of LLW Repository- .................................. 54
JAPAN-Part I. General Outline of LLW Repository- ............................................................. 64-Part II. Specific Site Safety Assessment of LLW Repository- .................................. 77
KAZAKHSTAN-Part I. General Outline of LLW Repository- ............................................................. 92-Part II. Specific Site Safety Assessment of LLW Repository- ................................ 109
MALAYSIA-Part I. General Outline of LLW Repository- ........................................................... 120-Part II. Specific Site Safety Assessment of LLW Repository- ................................ 128
MONGOLIA-Part I. General Outline of LLW Repository- ........................................................... 135
THE PHILIPPINES-Part I. General Outline of LLW Repository- ........................................................... 141-Part II. Specific Site Safety Assessment of LLW Repository- ................................ 144
THAILAND-Part I. General Outline of LLW Repository- ........................................................... 147-Part II. Specific Site Safety Assessment of LLW Repository- ................................ 159
VIETNAM-Part I. General Outline of LLW Repository- ........................................................... 163
RECENT ACTIVITIES ................................................................................................ 168
CONTRIBUTORS........................................................................................................ 169

Reproducing all or any part of the contents is prohibited without the author's permission.

PREFACE
The FNCA Radioactive Waste Management Project started in 1995 with the aim of
improving the safety of radioactive waste management in the Asian region. Since then, theFNCA member countries have been conducting the activities to exchange and share
information/experience gained from radioactive waste management among FNCA member
countries. It goes without saying that enhancing radioactive waste management activity ensuresand improves the nuclear safety in Asia. With the considerations of growing-up use of radiationand nuclear science/technology in Asian countries, the promoting exchange of knowledge andexperience related to radioactive waste management will lead to more effective international
cooperation. The workshop activities on radioactive waste management, which has long been
implemented between FNCA member countries, has been promoted a favorable developmentof nuclear safety culture between the participating countries.
As a pioneering project, the results of these activities were compiled in March 2003 in the
FNCA RWM Consolidated Report (FNCA RWM-R001): “The Consolidated Report on
Radioactive Waste Management in FNCA Countries”. Then, in March 2007, the revised
version was published as FNCA RWM-R004.
Since then, nearly 20 years have passed, and the progress has been made in the actual siteof low-level radioactive waste (LLW) disposal repositories in FNCA countries. In
consideration of this, the additional following-up investigations on the LLW disposal
repositories were necessary. A comprehensive study was conducted on the current situationof FNCA countries regarding the siting, public acceptance, planning, safety analysis andconstruction of low-level radioactive waste (LLW) disposal repositories, in taking into accountof actual surrounding situations of each participating country.
The study results are summarized in this integrated report. The structure of this report isdivided into two parts, one for general matters and for specific matters according to eachcountry report. We are expecting a useful application of this report among the people concerned.
Regarding the formulation of the report, we received various assistance from the persons.
We appreciate much these related persons.
March 1, 2020
Project Leader
KOSAKO Toshiso(Professor Emeritus, The University of Tokyo)iFramework of Regional Cooperation under FNCA
1. What is FNCA?
The 1st International Conference for Nuclear Cooperation in Asia (ICNCA) was held by the
Atomic Energy Commission in March 1990 to promote cooperation in the field of nuclear
energy with neighboring Asian countries more efficiently. Since then, the Atomic Energy
Commission of Japan has held many ICNCAs where the ministers in charge of development
and utilization of nuclear energy exchanged frank views on how to proceed with regional
cooperation, and has carried out practical cooperation on specified subjects as well. At the 10th
International Conference for Nuclear Cooperation in Asia held in March 1999, it was agreed tomove to a new framework, "Forum for Nuclear Cooperation in Asia" (including Coordinatorand Project Leader System) with a view and information to shifting to more effective andorganized cooperation activities. Under this framework, view and information exchanges are
made on the following fields: (1) Radiation Utilization Development (Industrial
Utilization/Environmental Utilization, and Healthcare Utilization), (2) Research Reactor
Utilization Development, (3) Nuclear Safety Strengthening, and (4) Nuclear Infrastructure
Strengthening.
2. Participating Countries
Australia, Bangladesh, China, Indonesia, Japan, Kazakhstan, Republic of Korea, Malaysia,
Mongolia, Philippines, Thailand and Vietnam
3. Framework
The basic framework of cooperation consists of the following three (See the figure on the nextpage). : Forum meeting
Discussion on cooperation measures and nuclear-energy policies.
Forum meeting is comprised of a ministerial level meeting and a senior official level one.
 Coordinators meeting
Discussion on the introduction, revision and abolishment, adjustment, and evaluation ofcooperation projects by an appointed coordinator from each country.
 Cooperation activities for each projectii

4. FNCA Radiation Safety and Radioactive Waste Management ProjectThis project superseded Radioactive Waste Management Project and started in 2008 withthe aims of sharing information and experiences in the area of Radiation Safety &Radioactive Waste Management processes and regulatory issues as well as facilitating
safety improvement and understanding of RS&RWM to public perception in nuclear
society.
In each member country, the use of radiation in industry, agriculture, medical treatment,
and various other fields is rapidly increasing, and at the same time, several countries arelooking into introducing nuclear power plants. In consideration of such tendency, member
countries have been discussing how to promote the standardization (calibration) on
personnel dosimeter, focusing on appropriate radiation exposure management.
The accumulated results acquired through these activities over ten years were published
as a serried of FNCA Consolidated Report on RWM/RS. These reports are available on
the FNCA Website.
[URL: https://www.fnca.mext.go.jp/english/rwm/e_projectreview.html]

iii

AUSTRALIA

0Australia-General

AUSTRALIA-Part I. General Outline of LLW Repository1.

General Policy

The aim of Australia’s management of radioactive waste is to safely and securely manage
Australia’s past and future radioactive waste holdings through appropriate processing,containment and eventual disposal. Doing so will reduce, to as low as practicable and justifiable,
the associated health, safety, environmental, financial, security and safeguards risks to current
and future generations.
The current policy, legislative and regulatory framework for the safe management ofradioactive waste in Australia includes each jurisdiction licensing radioactive waste
management activities. Radioactive waste management methods must conform to the highest
appropriate standards as determined by Commonwealth, state and territory regulators, andrequires acceptance by the general public. All radioactive waste management activities will bebased on the best available science and technology and conducted in an open and transparent
manner.
The Australian Government’s approach towards long-term radioactive waste management
includes implementing policy to site and establish a centralised, purpose-built National
Radioactive Waste Management Facility (NRWMF). This facility will dispose of Australia’s
domestically produced Low Level Waste (LLW), and store Intermediate Level Waste (ILW)
for a period of time sufficient for the Australian Government to establish a permanent ILW
disposal facility, consistent with international obligations and best practice. The AustralianGovernment has also implemented policy, legislation and regulations aimed at ensuring
Commonwealth waste holders and producers:

adopt measures for minimising the generation of radioactive waste
safely manage their waste until it is accepted by a national storage or disposal facility
dispose or store their waste at the NRWMF or the ILW disposal facility to the maximum
extent possible, rather than in other facilities.

The policy for Australia’s Low Level Waste repository is to have a facility which can disposeof all Australian generated low level radioactive waste. There will be a National Radioactive
Waste Function which is created under the Commonwealth Radioactive Waste Management
Act. This Waste Function is then responsible for all operational and future activities dealing
with Australia’s radioactive waste. The Waste Function will be responsible for purchasing thevolunteer site and establishing a builder-operator for the repository. There is an expectationthat the States and Territories of Australia will align their definitions of radioactivity with the1Australia-Generalcommonwealth through the National Directory of Radiation Protection and this facility will be
used for all national radioactive waste. The Commonwealth will assume all responsibilities forthe waste as it is accepted into the facility. The LLW Repository will be licenced and regulatedby ARPANSA, the commonwealth radiation regulator.
The Australian Radiation Protection policy is administered and upheld by ARPANSA. The
policy objectives are:

Regulatory activities and performance aligned with international best practice;o International best practice shall guide ARPANSA’s regulatory activities anddecision making. This typically means adapting IAEA documents to become
regulatory guides.



A nationally uniform approach;o ARPANSA shall establish partnerships with state and territory regulators. This
uniform approach is through the National Directory for Radiation Protection.

Engagement with government and national bodies;o ARPANSA shall establish effective and efficient means of national regulatory
collaboration.



Independence;o ARPANSA shall act independently of any other interests in carrying out its
regulatory activities.



Prime responsibility rests with the operator;o ARPANSA shall establish and maintain clear demarcation of responsibilities
between the regulator and the operator.



Organisational structure and external advisors;o ARPANSA shall optimise its structure and allocation of responsibilities andresources to promote best practicable regulatory performance.

Multiple and graded approaches to management of radiation risks;o ARPANSA’s regulatory approach shall be based on understanding hazards,
risks and interdependencies, be predictable and strive to eliminate unnecessary
regulatory burden.



Accountability;o ARPANSA shall act transparently and engage with stakeholders.

The Australian Department of Environment and Energy designs and implements AustralianGovernment policy and programs to protect and conserve the environment, water and heritage,
promote climate action, and provide adequate, reliable and affordable energy. The main pieceof legislation to enact this is the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act(EPBC) which has the objectives:

2

Australia-Generalprovide for the protection of the environment, especially matters of national
environmental significance






conserve Australian biodiversity
provide a streamlined national environmental assessment and approvals processenhance the protection and management of important natural and cultural places
control the international movement of plants and animals (wildlife), wildlife specimens
and products made or derived from wildlife



promote ecologically sustainable development through the conservation andecologically sustainable use of natural resources

recognise the role of Indigenous people in the conservation and ecologically sustainable
use of Australia's biodiversity



promote the use of Indigenous peoples' knowledge of biodiversity with the involvementof, and in cooperation with, the owners of the knowledge.

The above objectives are at a Commonwealth level and cover matters of national environmental
significance. One of these matters of national environmental significance is protecting theenvironment from nuclear actions. There are definitions of what are nuclear actions, which
includes building, operating, decommissioning a nuclear reactor or nuclear chemical
production facility. It also includes the establishment of a radioactive waste facility. This act
also bans an action that would create a nuclear fuel fabrication plant; a nuclear power plant; anenrichment plant; or a reprocessing facility.
Again, there are state based environmental regulators which regulate the radioactive industries(hospitals, universities and private industry) which operate within the bounds of the state.
Australia does not have a spent fuel policy. ANSTO has an organisational policy of minimising
the amount of waste to be managed, and reprocesses its used fuel in France and the UK, taking
back the residues as vitrified containers.
2.

Principles and Safety Assessment

Australia uses the IAEA structures and guidance for its regulation and expectations ofradioactive licencees. One of the main requirements is to justify the use of radioactivity anddemonstrate that the safety of the action to individuals, the community and environment. This
demonstration of the safety of the activity is called the Safety Case. This is a suite of documents
which are used to thoroughly explain the process, equipment and structures which demonstratethat the required work is safe. The main requirements are on nuclear and radiation safety,
although standard work health and safety requirements are also required to be met. The Safety
Case also includes information on how the risk assessments are conducted, and the principles
on which it is based. The risk assessment process will include specific studies on the3

Australia-Generalenvironmental impact, community and cultural impacts, heritage impacts and safety impacts.
The principles of radiation protection and collation of the national inventory are also explained.
The national inventory is the responsibility of the Australian Federal Government and they
have used a team of experts to compile the inventory which is being reported in the Joint
Convention on Spent Fuel and Radioactive Waste Management.
Following the national radiation protection policy, the regulator follows international bestpractice by implementing and following the IAEA guidelines. This means that, for example,
the IAEA transport of radioactive materials (SSR-6) is exactly copied into the AustralianDangerous Goods Code.
The regulator expects to have stakeholder engagement at all points in the licencing process.
This means that as well as radiation protection, there needs to be involvement from security,environmental protection, emergency management, conventional work health and safety andfinances. These are the internal stakeholders, and there are external stakeholders such as the
public, the other regulators, for commonwealth entities there are the government departments
and approval process (financial and environmental).
3.

Regulatory and Operational System Preparation

Australia has an independent regulator, the Australian Radiation Protection And Nuclear Safety
Agency (ARPANSA) who report to the Department (Minister) of Health at the Commonwealth
Level. ARPANSA are the Australian Government's primary authority on radiation protection
and nuclear safety. ARPANSA protects the people and the environment from the harmful
effects of radiation through research, the services provided and regulation of Commonwealthentities that use radiation. The strategic objectives are to:Protect the public, workers and the environment from radiation exposure
Ensure radiological and nuclear safety and security and emergency preparedness
Promote the effective use of ionising radiation in medicine

Ensure effective and proportionate regulation and enforcement activities.

ARPANSA regulates all the Commonwealth Entities that use radiation, which are primarily
the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO), the Commonwealth
Scientific Industrial and Research Organisation (CSIRO) and Defence. ANSTO and CSIRO
report to the Department (and Minister) of Innovation, Industry and Science, while Defence
report to the Department (and Minister) of Defence.
The regulator in Australia has a risk assessed, performance based criteria. This is to make theoperator of the nuclear facility (licencee) the person responsible for all safety. The licencee
proposes the action and submits the safety case to the regulator who then reviews and assesses
4Australia-General

the safety case to international standards. The operator uses the national inventory to establish
the waste acceptance criteria and design of the facility. This is the physical description of the
facility, the waste form and the packages which are used to contain the waste. The operator has
to develop the plans which describe how site control, safety, waste, security, emergency andenvironmental plans and arrangements for the facility will be managed. In Australia theoperator of the national facility will be decided upon in 2020. In preparation the federal
government has been preparing a generic waste acceptance criteria and a generic facility design.
When the facility operator is decided, then the operator will take on the responsibilities for thedesign, waste acceptance criteria and national inventory of radioactive waste.
At the state level, there are 6 radiation regulators, which sit either under Departments of Healthor Environment Departments within their governments. The waste producers in the state areas
sit under Health (for hospitals) and Education (for Universities).

Prime Minister

NSW Premier

Department ofIndustry,
Innovation andScience

ANSTO

CSIRO

Radioactive Waste
Taskforce

Department of
HealthDepartment ofPlanning, Industry
and Environment

ARPANSA

Environmental
Protection Agency

Ministry of Health

Currently there is no central radioactive waste management organisation, although there is anintention to establish one with the establishment NRWMF.
The producer of the waste is considered the owner and has the liability for disposal of the waste.
There is the expectation that the waste generator will pay for the disposal of the waste at the
LLW repository. The disposal rates will be decided by the LLW Repository Operator. As
ANSTO, CSIRO and Defence are all commonwealth government organisations, the liability isowned by the Commonwealth Government and it will pay for the disposal of these wastes. The
LLW repository operator will take ownership of the waste once the waste leaves the waste
generator sites and is shown to comply with the Waste Acceptance Criteria.
The national inventory will be controlled by the central radioactive waste organisation, but will
rely on the information supplied by the waste generators to be accurate. The waste will not be
accepted by the LLW repository unless it is on the inventory. The LLW disposal operator will
set the Waste Acceptance Criteria as part of the Safety Case for the operations of the NRWMF.
5Australia-General

The Waste Acceptance Criteria as written will be approved by the regulator (ARPANSA) andany changes to the Waste Acceptance Criteria will require regulatory approval.
All new radioactive licences, whether they apply to new facilities, decommissioning activities
or major changes of use to a facility, require a public consultation process as part of thelicencing activities. The Australian public is generally anti-nuclear and there are lots of activist
groups who will comment on the submissions for new licences. Questions asked by the public
have to be answered to the regulators satisfaction, and all questions and answers are publicly
available through the internet. In addition, the large waste producers (ANSTO, CSIRO), theregulators (ARPANSA and EPA) and the LLW Repository Operator have community outreachprograms to engage the public and promote positive messages about radiation and the safe
handling of radioactive waste.
4.

Site Selection:

In Australia the site selection process is an individual volunteer process. This means that whena person with sufficient land can sell it to the government for the national repository. When theprocess was started there were 28 nominations, which were assessed against a set of criteria.
These criteria were decided by an independent advisory panel to the federal government, which
included an anti-nuclear campaigner. These criteria related to the physical characteristics of thesite, the social issues of the site and the economic viability of the site. Interestingly, facility
safety was not rated highly because the assumption is that it will meet all the regulatory
requirements and would be equally safe wherever it is sited. Safety would not be a determining
factor but a requirement. There is a lengthy report on the criteria and the multi-criteria
assessment for all sites has been released to the public. The political and the social factors weremuch more important in the site selection process. One of the factors which the minister istaking into account is community acceptance of the LLW repository. In practice this will bedecided by a local ballot of the communities to determine the level of support in each area. The
Government Minister for Resources is the person responsible for making the decision about
the site for a LLW repository.

6Australia-General

Figure 1: Seismic Map of Australia

Figure 2: Climate Map of Australia

Figure 3: Population Density in Australia

7

Australia-General

The community consultation process required a large amount of work from the Australian
nuclear industry to discuss and communicate the concerns of the public at these locations. The
Federal government is responsible for choosing the site and has selected three sites for further
consideration. These sites are currently undergoing environmental assessment, heritage
surveys and extended community consultation processes. The community which hosts thefacility will have a fund provided to improve the community conditions, this fund is larger thanthe landowner will receive for the land. The environmental impact assessment, sitecharacteristics and criteria assessment will all form part of the safety case for the facility.
5.

Design and Construction of disposal Facilities

In Australia the design and construction of disposal facilities for low level solid waste andstorage of intermediate level waste is continuing. The federal government will be appointing
an entity to be responsible for Radioactive Waste Management Function in Australia; thedevelopment of generic waste acceptance criteria and a generic design; and the selection of thesite. When the Waste Function is selected, that organisation will assume control of the selectedsite and can use the specific information to optimize the waste acceptance criteria, the facility
design and overall safety case for the disposal site. The detailed design of the facility will leadto detailed waste acceptance criteria, which will lead to detailed package types, which will leadto optimization of the design. This is an iterative process with a large number of variables thatneed to be continually revised.
The detailed design will require an organisational governance structure, organisational chartwith all the supporting services (maintenance, human resources, it, security, financial, logistics,etc), utilities (power, transport provisions, water, etc) as well as the design of the facilities.
The Australian design for a waste disposal facility is based on the French and Spanish designof a concrete vault with packaged waste placed inside. This is an engineered barrier to retard
water, and when a vault is completed a series of engineered caps will be put over the vault to
direct water away from the vault.
There will need to a safety case which will be continually updated to the regulator.
I.

The initial safety case will be for the siting of the disposal facility. This is where the site
description and initial safety case will be published for public comment. There will be aninternational review for the regulators decision and international best practice will befollowed. Upon successful assessment detailed assessments will begin.

II. The next regulatory review will be on the construction licence, with the updated safetycase for review. Upon successful assessment, the construction of the facility will begin,concluding with commissioning of the facility.
8

Australia-General

III. IAt the completion of the construction and the commissioning, the commissioning reports
and operating licence submission will be submitted. This will be the final safety case open
for public comment before waste is transported and disposed in the facility.
IV. The safety case will be updated through the life of the facility every 10 years for
submission to the regulator.
V. A licence change for closure of the facility will be submitted in 100 years time, with thefacility going into the care and maintenance phase. This is a major design change where
no waste will be emplaced, vaults closed, the facilities will be decommissioned and all theengineering barriers over the vaults will be constructed and monitored. This monitoring
period is called institutional control.
VI. At the end of the institutional control period (at the moment planned to be 300 years, itwill depend on the safety case), there will be a licence submission to abandon the licence.
The safety case at this point will show that no harm will come to people who accidentally
disturb the waste in the vaults.

9Australia-Specific-Part II. Specific Site Safety Assessment of LLW Repository1.

General considerations for Safety Assessment

Australian is still in the process of establishing a repository. The Safety assessment has started,and there are generic details about inventory, design and location, however there is yet to be adraft safety assessment completed.
The safety assessment will take information from the inventory, design, environmental
assessment, logistics, and organisational structure to create the risk assessment and develop the
document. In the description above, we are starting the safety case for point I. This will bebased on IAEA guidance SSG-23 - The Safety Case and Safety Assessment for the Disposal ofRadioactive Waste.
2.

Specific LLW repository planning

The Department of Industry, Innovation and Science has established a taskforce to run therepository project. The scope of the taskforce is to select a site and identify the agency who
will become the owner of the radioactive waste liabilities in Australia. This taskforce has thencontracted out works to various parties to allow this to happen. There are community
consultation groups, surveying groups, environmental impact assessors, logistics assessors and
ANSTO as nuclear and radiological expertise for the facility.
The organisational arrangements of the radioactive waste management agency have been
identified. The radioactive waste management agency will be the entity responsible for therepository after the site is selected. It will be their internal approval processes which willapprove everything. This is the business case, organisational plan, the operational plan, the site
design, the facility design, the supporting infrastructure (inside and outside the fence) design,
the waste plans, emergency plans, safety management system, environmental management
system, quality management system, records management system, the financial forecast, thesafety case, and so on. They will be independent of a government department, although thehead / chief executive officer / president of the radioactive waste management agency willreport to the Minister for the Department of Industry, Innovation and Science. This is the waythat ANSTO and CSIRO and other government organisations operate.

10Australia-SpecificFigure 4: Possible location for the NRWMF, Wallerberdina, South Australia

There will be oversight by the regulators, and the regulators will approve the operations, safetycase, environmental impact and financial performance of the facility. The waste plan will bedecided by the radioactive waste management agency, with the overall safety case approved by
ARPANSA. The funding will be asked by the radioactive waste management agency to the
Commonwealth Government who will supply the funding.
The design of the repository has been undertaken by ANSTO, who did the nuclear design andoperational flows and then utilised a sub-contractor to design the actual buildings andinfrastructure required. The initial generic draft of the long term safety case of the repository
was contracted to ANSTO, as was the draft generic waste acceptance criteria and national
inventory. Essentially, everything within the fence surrounding the repository was contracted
to ANSTO to complete. This included the detailed business case which was supplied to thewhole of government for funding over the coming years.
The area outside the fence was contracted to AECOM. This included the environmental
assessment, the roads, rail, water, communications and other infrastructure which is required
to operate the repository. When these are designed, the government will have to improve theroads to take road trains, maybe create a new rail line, supply electricity (either by building
new poles and wires or by building a local power supply like a solar panel farm), supply
communications and supply water. Water is a big issue in Australia, particularly in the area
where the selected sites can be found. There is no reliable surface supply of water, and water
extraction from the ground will impact on the local farming communities.
It is expected that staff for the facility will live in the local community and will not be
considered as fly-in-fly-out (FIFO) staff. One of the selling points from the local governmentis that the workers will contribute to the local community. There will also be a strong preferenceto employ people from the local community. There will be training offered for local workers to
11Australia-Specificbecome environmental monitoring officers, radiation protection staff, operators moving thewaste, admin staff, tour guides and so on. Some positions may at first be filled in by experts
coming from other locations, such as risk assessors, safety case experts, engineering support
or government liaison officers. However it is expected that the resource planning of theoperating agency will build the skills of local staff so that they will be able to take on theseroles. There will be an outsourced maintenance model, and local businesses will be muchpreferred to complete the maintenance of the facility.
There is a strong preference for the operating agency to be an addition to an existing
government organisation. This will not affect the number of staff needed to work in the facility,
but will reduce the number of people required in the “back office”. The larger organisation will
have the human resources, quality, information technology, finance, conventional workplace
health and safety, security, nuclear safeguards, environmental systems and emergency planning
protocols in place which can easily be extended to this facility. These enabling services are
required, and it will be cheaper for the Commonwealth if it does not have to create all thesenew positions.
The logistics will be undertaken by the radioactive waste agency when the location is known.
There have been brief discussions with freight companies to ask how it is done, and these havebeen used in the financial estimates for operations. The transport containers are being designed
to fit onto both road and rail transport with no special vehicles needed.
The community have input, but do not get to decide anything. They can question, discuss andmake recommendations to the radioactive waste management agency or ARPANSA. These
have to be resolved, however the radioactive waste management agency will be the final
decision maker in all of these discussions. Due to the Australian government operating
philosophy, there will be a lot of consideration given to community concerns, and work will bedone to include their ideas.
Emergency preparedness will be organised by the radioactive waste management agency, using
local resources (bushfire response, police, guard force and medical support). There may be
additional resources required and funded by the repository to ensure that there is adequate
emergency response available for the identified accident scenarios.
The regulator will be regularly visiting the site and conducting inspections. These inspections
are publicly available on the ARPANSA website and indicate what they have found. If there
are any non-compliances with the licences then these are reported to parliament and recorded.
The public can also communicate to ARPANSA to raise their concerns.

12Australia-Specific3.

Guidelines for Safety Assessment

Australia will use the IAEA guidelines on safety assessments (SSG-23) as the starting point fordeveloping the safety assessment for the low level waste repository. This will require getting a
lot of information from many independent sources to provide the information.
The information will come from independent organisations and from ANSTO expertise. There
will be environmental assessments, hydrological assessments, cultural and historicalassessments, geological assessments, conducted by independent expert groups. This
information will require detailed study of the location, and will require 12 months of data about
the site to demonstrate that all seasons of the year are considered and feed into the design ofthe facility. This information will be compiled into an environmental impact assessment. This
will be approved by the environmental regulator which will inform the radiation protection
regulator of the outcome.
The national inventory will be supplied by the radioactive waste agency and will be used as thesource term for the long term safety case which will use all the location specific environmental
information collected by the independent groups. This long term safety case will be used todetermine the Waste Acceptance Criteria for the facility.
The long term safety case will also define some of the requirements of the design, such as thequality of the material used in construction, the depth of the waste beneath the surface (whether
buried or covered in an engineered barrier) or any external barriers put into place around thewaste. The design of the radiological safety components, the long term safety case, the waste
acceptance criteria and other requirements around radiation or nuclear safety will be conductedby nuclear experts and reviewed prior to submission to the regulator.
There will be an international review of the safety case, which may use IAEA networks, prior
to it being submitted to the radiation protection regulator for approval. The Department ofIndustry, Innovation and Science has indicated that it is planning to have an ARTEMIS mission
by the IAEA review the repository design, safety case and process.
4.

Confidence Building

Currently there is significant community consultation going on in the areas around the selectedsites. This includes funding someone in the area to act as a local liaison officer and having acommittee of local representatives to discuss the repository, how it will affect the town and theway that the town can use the money from the government from hosting the site to better the
town. There are lots of meetings and interactions involving brought in experts, drop in centers,
discussion booths at local fairs and information fact sheets or leaflets provided to members of
the public. There has been a social media presence with facebook accounts, twitter accounts,
13

Australia-Specificlinkedin accounts and a website with a lot of information on it. This has been happening overa three year period and will continue through the operational period of the repository.
The Commonwealth Government has been issuing lots of information in the lead up to a ballot
in the communities asking if they would like to be considered in the next phase of the decision.
This ballot is not binding, however the Minister will consider the outcomes in their decisionon the siting of the repository. The first location had a ballot which had 62% of the local
residents vote in favour of having the disposal facility in their community.
There is funding for the land owner as the government buys the land at four times the prevailingrate. There is a fund (>$12M AUD) for the local community to invest into the town and use as
the local committee determines.
ARPANSA has been out to explain the process of licencing to the community, includingemphasising that the community gets to make comments on every submission; siting,construction, operation and closure. All documents (except those with security implications)will be available for the public to review, on the ARPANSA website and at the information
sessions. The repository owner has to respond to all the questions satisfactorily for the regulator
to approve the submission. ARPANSA will be reviewing the safety assessment, the Department
for the Environment will be reviewing the Environmental Impact Assessment, the roadauthorities / marine authorities / air authorities will be reviewing the packaging and theParliamentary Works Committee will be reviewing and approving the spending of any taxpayers money. There appears to be community acceptance in the regulators for the facility.
The government will be using Australian procurement guidelines to ensure that the contracts
for construction and equipment are trackable and free from corruption. The owners and allcontractors will have to be certified as ISO9001 compliant. This means there will be an audit
program conducted by internal staff members and external staff members. The audit outcomes
will not be publicly available, however if an organisation loses ISO9001 accreditation then thatorganisation can no longer be part of the repository, or support the repository.
5.

References:www.radioactivewaste.gov.au (including image)www.arpansa.gov.au
Australia’s Radioactive Waste Policy - https://www.industry.gov.au/sites/default/files/201904/australian_radioactive_waste_management_framework.pdf
Australia’s Radiation Protection Policy - https://www.arpansa.gov.au/regulation-andlicensing/regulation/regulatory-integrity/policy-arpansas-regulatory-activities
Australia’s Environmental Policy - https://www.environment.gov.au/epbc/about
Australian National Report, prepared for the Sixth Review Meeting of the Joint Convention
14

Australia-Specificon the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste
Management (IAEA Joint Convention) https://www.arpansa.gov.au/sites/default/files/jc2017_october_2017.pdf
Seismic map - http://www.ga.gov.au/about/projects/safety/nsha (http://geoscienceau.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html?webmap=490e068f37494dbc997a2f7e55d4c
c4d)
Climate Map - http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/how/newproducts/images/zones.shtml
Population map - https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/3218.0
Artemis mission - https://www.iaea.org/services/review-missions/integrated-review-servicefor-radioactive-waste-and-spent-fuel-management-decommissioning-and-remediationartemis
IAEA documentation https://www.iaea.org/resources/safety-standards/search
GSG-1 Classification of Radioactive Waste
GSG-3 The Safety Case and Safety Assessment for the Predisposal Management ofRadioactive Waste
GSR Part 1 Governmental, Legal and Regulatory Framework for Safety
GSR Part 3 Radiation Protection and Safety of Radiation Sources: International Basic Safety
Standards
GSR Part 4 Safety Assessment for Facilities and Activities
GSR Part 5 Predisposal Management of Radioactive Waste
GS-G-3.3 The Management System for the Processing, Handling and Storage of Radioactive
Waste
GS-G-3.4 The Management System for the Disposal of Radioactive Waste
GSG-9 Regulatory Control of Radioactive Discharges to the Environment
GS-R-3 The Management System for Facilities and Activities
RS-G-1.7 Application of the Concepts of Exclusion, Exemption and Clearance
SSG-1 Borehole Disposal Facilities for Radioactive Waste
SSG-14 Geological Disposal Facilities for Radioactive Waste
SSG-23 The Safety Case and Safety Assessment for the Disposal of Radioactive Waste
SSG-29 Near Surface Disposal Facilities for Radioactive Waste
SSG-31 Monitoring and Surveillance of Radioactive Waste Disposal Facilities
SSG-35 Site Survey and Site Selection for Nuclear Installations
SSG-40 Predisposal Management of Radioactive Waste from Nuclear Power Plants andResearch Reactors
SSG-41 Predisposal Management of Radioactive Waste from Nuclear Fuel Cycle Facilities
SSG-41 Predisposal Management of Radioactive Waste from the Use of Radioactive Material
in Medicine, Industry, Agriculture, Research and Education
SSR-5 Disposal of Radioactive WasteSSR-6 Regulations for the Safe Transport of15

Australia-SpecificRadioactive Material
TS-G-1.4 The Management System for the Safe Transport of Radioactive Material
WS-G-1.2 Management of Radioactive Waste from the Mining and Milling of Ores
WS-G-2.3 Regulatory Control of Radioactive Discharges to the Environment
WS-G-6.1 Storage of Radioactive Waste

16

BANGLADESH

17

Bangladesh-General

BANGLADESH-Part I. General Outline of LLW Repository1.

General Policy

In Bangladesh radiation is being utilised in industry, agriculture and medical treatment
purposes. The research and development on radiation applications of Bangladesh Atomic
Energy Commission (BAEC) covers utilisation of the research reactor, radiation processing
and technology, application of radioisotopes, food irradiation etc. Radioactive wastes generated
from different stakeholders in the country are safely stored at Central Waste Processing andStorage Facility (CWPSF). No suitable site yet been selected for disposal of radioactive waste
in the country. The area survey is underway and site selection procedures will be conductedaccording IAEA recommendations. Suitable site for waste disposal facility will be finalised on
the basis of analysing several data on seismic fault, flood, water table, rainfall, cyclone risk,soil type, surface fault and hydrogelogical characteristics.
The Legal basis for the safe management of radioactive wastes are Bangladesh Atomic Energy
Regulatory (BAERA) Act-2012 and Nuclear Safety and Radiation Control (NSRC) Rules-1997
based closely on the BSS apply to regulate activities that involve sources of ionising radiationand management of radioactive waste, to ensure the protection of man and the environment
from the hazards of ionising radiations associated with radiation sources and radioactive wastes.
2.

Principles and Safety Assessment

According to NSRC rules 1997 chapter X and section no. 87, radioactive waste management
practices shall comply with the requirements of the applicable safety series published under
IAEA Radwass programme. The activity and volume of any radioactive waste arising fromuses of radiation sources shall be kept to the minimum practicable.
For the disposal of radioactive waste the essential protection goal are:






Long term protection of man and the environment against hazardous effect of therelease of harmful substances from RW packages
Unnecessary radiation exposure or contamination of man and environment must be
avoidedAdequate safety compliance with the regulatory requirements
Determine guide research and development priorities
Contribute to confidence of policy makers and scientific community

The protection goals have to be further to be suitable for consideration in the development of
the site selection procedure.
18

Bangladesh-General

Regulatory and Operational System Preparation
BAER act No.19/2012 chapter IV and NSRC rules 1997 describe the general safety
requirements. The applicable standards, code and guide for Radioactive Waste Management
programme are IAEA Safety series nos. 53, 63, 79, 11-SF, 111-S1, 111-G1.1, G3.1 and other
IAEA RADWASS publication.
General standards for the protection of human health and environment are set out in a nationalin legislation. The regulatory authority develops regulatory requirement specific to disposal
facilities on the basis of the national policy.
The regulatory body establish the regulatory requirements for the development of disposal
facility for radioactive waste and set out the procedures for meeting the requirements for thevarious stages of the licensing process. It also set conditions for the development, operationand closure of disposal facility and carry out such activities as are necessary to ensure that theconditions are met.
The regulatory body has to:
•
•
•

•
•
•

•

develop regulatory requirements
provide guidance on the interpretation of the national legislation and regulatory
requirements,
engage in dialogue with waste producers, the operators of the disposal facility andinterested parties to ensure that the regulatory requirements are appropriate andpracticablemaintain competent staff, to acquire capabilities for independent assessment and toundertake international co-operation as necessary to fulfill its regulatory functions
document the procedures that it uses to evaluate the safety of disposal facility
set out the procedures that a repository operator is expected to follow in demonstratingcompliance with the conditions for the development and operation of the disposal
facility
set out the procedures that it follows to assess compliance with the conditions
throughout all stages of the development, operation and closure of the disposal facility.

The operator of a radioactive waste disposal facility is responsible for its safety. The operator
carries out safety assessment and develop and maintain a safety case, and carries out all thenecessary activities for site selection and evaluation, design, construction, operation, closure
and, if necessary, surveillance after closure, in accordance with national strategy, in compliancewith the regulatory requirements and within the legal and regulatory infrastructure. The
operator of disposal facilities responsible for19Bangladesh-General

•

•
•

•

•

conduct or commission the research and development work necessary to ensure that theplanned technical operations can be practically and safely accomplished, and todemonstrate this.
carry out all the necessary investigations of sites and of materials, and has to assess
their suitability and obtain all the data necessary for the purposes of safety assessment
establish technical specifications that are justified by safety assessment, to ensure thatthe disposal facility is developed in accordance with the safety case (waste acceptancecriteria, controls, limits).
retain all the information relevant to the safety case for the facility, and has to retain theinspection records that demonstrate compliance with regulatory requirements and withthe operator’s own specification.
cooperate with the regulatory body and has to supply all the information that theregulatory body may request.

According to NSRC rules Chapter IV section 17, the safety and fire protection shall beincorporated in all plans, design and layout of building, structures and premises and applicablestandards and codes shall be followed for making such plans, design and layout. For installation,commissioning, operation and storing of radioactive material possible risk to health and safetyof employees and properties shall have to be anticipated.
3.

Site Selection

Currently no specific site has been chosen for waste repository in the country. However,collection of meteorological data, study on Hydro geological characteristics for selecting ofappropriate site for waste are being conducted. According to NSRC rules 1997 chapter IV
section 17.3 during the site selection process, the factors which affect exposure or potential
exposure of radiation workers other employers and members of public for radioactive materials
and having the potential for large release into the environment the relevant features(environmental factors and local population) shall take into account. In BAER act 2012 chapter
III section 19 describes the relevant act for siting of radioactive waste disposal facility.
Previously, site selection was regarded as primarily a technical process aagreement on, andapplication of, exclusion and suitability criteria ranking of site attributes, utility analysis.
However, currently it is important include more non-technical aspects like public outreach andcommunication, site volunteers and compensation packages in order to comply with IAEA
recommendation. The general criteria for a suitable site for a low level waste repository :Simple geological-techtonic structure, non-existence of deep aquifers with meteoric water, no
recent tectonic activities, rock with low permeability and good retention potential forradionuclide, favourable rock-mechanic properties of the repository formation etc. The
20

Bangladesh-Generalgeological, techtonic and hydrogeological conditions need to be assessed for determining thesite of waste repository. The site selection procedure of waste repository has to be:
4.

Comply with the legislation of the country
Acceptable to local and national community
Geologically stable

Design and Construction of Disposal Facilities

Since currently there is no disposal facility available in the country all the processed andunprocessed radioactive wastes are generated in the country from research, medical, industrial
and laboratories are safely stored in CWPSF.
In general the operator of a disposal facility is responsible for all necessary activities for design,
construction, operation and closure, in compliance with the regulatory requirements and within
national legal infrastructure. The operator is responsible for developing and for demonstrating
its safety, consistent with the requirements of the regulatory body.
The facility and its engineered barriers need to be designed to provide safety during theoperational period. The construction activities have to be carried out in such a way to ensure
safety during the operational period.
The disposal facility and its engineered barriers need to be designed• to contain the waste with its associated hazard,• to be physically and chemically compatible with the host geological formation
and/or surface environment, and• to provide safety features after closure that complement those features affordedby the host environment.
According to NSRC rules the design reliability, durability and easy manageability andoperational suitability, multilayer protection and defense in depth and the requirements ofoperational environment, human environment related procedural aspects and other humanfactors are applied. The relevant act for the authorisation process for radioactive wastes
disposal facility has been mentioned in BAER Act No. 19/2012.

21

Bangladesh-Specific-Part II. Specific Site Safety Assessment of LLW Repository1.

General Considerations for Safety Assessment

The safety objective is to site, design, construct, operate and close a disposal facility so that
protection after its closure is optimised social and economic factors being taken into account.
The general consideration for the safety assessment is to provide radiological safety.
In order to meet the basic safety objective several requirements e.g, general safety requirement,
Technical requirement and Management requirement need be complied as described in the
NSRC Rules 1997 Chapter X and BAER Act 2012, Chapter IV.
During the operational period
Safety in the operation of radioactive waste disposal facilities has to be achieved by means ofa variety of engineered and operational controls.
These include the containment and shielding for the radioactive waste and operational control
over time of exposure and proximity to the waste.
Safety after closure: is achieved by developing a disposal system in which the various
components work together to provide and to ensure the required level of safety
Protection of the public: by preventing or controlling releases from the facility and bycontrolling access to the site. A reasonable assurance has to be provided that doses and risks tomembers of the public in the long term will not exceed the dose constraints or risk constraints
that were used as design criteria.
The dose limit for members of the public from all planned exposure situations is an effective
dose of 1 mSv in a year and 50 msv occupational dose limit in single year, and this or its risk
equivalent are considered criteria not to be exceeded in the future.
Environmental and non-radiological concerns
The scope of safety requirements for disposal of radioactive waste is the protection of theenvironment against radiological hazards associated with the radioactive material in thedisposal facility.
The assessment of conventional environmental impacts such as may occur in the construction
and operational period for a disposal facility, e.g. impacts relating to traffic, noise, visualamenity, disturbance of natural habitats, restrictions on land use and social and economic
factors, as well as non-radiological toxic hazard also has to be assessed where this is significant.

22

Bangladesh-Specific

If non-radioactive materials may affect the release and migration of radioactive contaminantsfrom the radioactive waste, then such interactions have to be considered in the safetyassessment.
According to NSRC rules 1997, during the operation, adequate technical capability to support
all aspects important for safety, security and safeguard during the whole operational life timeshall have to be taken into consideration.
2.

Specific LLW Repository site (planning etc.)

At present no waste repository available for disposal of RW in the country. The central waste
processing and storage facility is the only licensed facility for performing pre-disposal
activities in the country. However, some preliminary work on area survey and study on seismic
fault, flood, water table, hydro geological characteristics at different location around thecountry are being conducted for selecting suitable site for radioactive waste repository.
In general, site characterization is an essential part of the repository development programmethat should start as soon as the site has been identified. To gather all the information required
to compile a credible safety case. To gain and to demonstrate an understanding of the site sothat a convincing case can be used for its safety which is a multi-disciplinary exercise covers avery wide range of activities. For determining the site characteristics that are important to theassessment of the design and safety of a low level waste repository, the following need beconsidered as a minimum:






low permeability and high retardation properties
In environmental settings that would restrict sub-surface and surface radionuclide
movement (e.g. low hydraulic gradients or basinal settings)
In environmental settings where radionuclide releases would result in long travel paths
and long travel times back to potential receptors
Areas away from major population centres
Close to existing or planned transport infrastructure

The Radioactive waste disposal facility need to be compliance with the stages of authorization
procedures of nuclear, radiation and radioactive waste disposal facility BAER Act 12 Chapter
III section19.
3.

Guidelines for Safety Assessment

Depending on the stage of development of the facility, safety assessment may be used infocusing research, and its results may be used to assess compliance with the safety objective

23

Bangladesh-Specificand safety criteria. The requirement of safety assessment of a waste disposal facility need to becompliance with the BAER act 12 and NSRC rules 1997.
Generally safety assessment is the process of systematically analysing the hazards associatedwith a disposal facility, and the ability of the site and the design of the facility to provide forthe fulfilment of safety functions and to meet technical requirements. Safety assessment has toinclude quantification of the overall level of performance, analysis of the associateduncertainties, and comparison with the relevant design requirements and safety standards.
Safety guides provide comprehensive guidance on and international best practices for meeting
the requirements of disposal facility Safety assessment of a disposal facilities need to address
the following important components:
Characterization of hydro geological parameters:
Requires extensive hydrological investigations: Permeability and hydraulic conductivity,
weather, topography, surface storage, infiltration, evapotranspiration, soil storage, lateraldrainage, leakage through linear and geo-membrane etc.

4.

Specification of the assessment context

Description of the waste disposal systemDevelopment and justification of the scenariosFormulation and implementation of models

Analysis of results and building of confidence

Confidence Building

An appropriate management system will contribute to confidence that the relevant
requirements and criteria for site selection and evaluation, design, construction, operation,
closure and safety after closure are met. The management system for waste disposal facility
provides for the preparation and retention of documentary evidence to illustrate that thenecessary quality of data has been achieved. The management system also ensures the collationof all the information that is important to safety and that is recorded at all steps of thedevelopment and operation of the facility, and the preservation of that information. The safetyof the disposal facility needs to be assessed periodically until termination of the licence. During
this period, the safety shall also be assessed when a safety significant modification is planned
or in the event of changes with regard to the conditions of the authorization. In the event thatany requirements set down in the Safety Requirements publication are not met, measures shallbe put in place to upgrade the safety of the facility, economic and social factors being taken
into account. During the review of operator’s quality assurance programme by regulatory
authority the following component taken into account:24

Bangladesh-Specific







Maintain and produce waste inventory
Site plans, engineering drawings, specifications and process description
Safety and environmental assessment methods and computer codes
Environmental monitoring programme
Result of safety and environmental assessments
Effluent and environmental impact monitoring results

Measures of surveillance and control of the disposal facilities include:

restrictions on access by people and by animals;
inspection of physical conditions;retention of appropriate maintenance capabilities;

According to NSRC rules chapter IX section 56. The following monitoring programme isrequired:












Assessment of external radiation level at all appropriate location
Assessment of levels of radioactive contamination at all appropriate locations
Assessment of radiation risks associated with the accident and emergency situation
The review of the monitoring progamme carry out periodically and also in the event ofany major modification carried out to the installation or practices
Surveillance of the Environment: According to NSRC rules 1997 section: 57:
Surveillance for the environment include:
Compliance with the authorized limit
Assessment of potential exposure of members of the public from the source underconsideration
Evaluation of trends of exposure levels in the environment
Monitoring of , environmental pathways and the critical group and the pre operational
studies
Appropriate maintenance of the record of the measurements of external exposure andradioactive contamination and the estimate of doses received by the populations

To verify compliance with quality assurance programme independent audit may be carried out
which have been mentioned in the BAER Act 12, Chapter IV section 30.

25

CHINA

26

China-General

CHINA-Part I. General Outline of LLW Repository1.

General Policy

The task of shallow ground disposal is to limit the radionuclides in the waste to thedisposal site within the time frame (generally 300a to 500a) in which the waste may pose anunacceptable risk to humans. Preventing the spread of radionuclides to the environment at
unacceptable concentrations or quantities and protecting the human safety.
2.

Principles and Safety Assessment

Solid radioactive waste shall be disposed of in accordance with their classification. Solid
LILW shall be disposed of in near-surface or intermediate depth disposal facilities. Solid HLW
waste shall be disposed of in a centralized deep geological disposal repository. Wastes arisingfrom uranium (thorium) mining and milling tend to be in relatively-centralized in-situ landfill.
In order to estimate the functions of the LLW repository, safety analysis andenvironmental impact assessment must be performed when selecting a plan, determining thesite, designing, operating, and shutting down the site.
The effective annual dose of radionuclides released to the environment through various
routes to representative individuals in the public does not exceed 0.25 mSv. Provide protection
for individuals who unintentionally break into the disposal site or come into contact with waste
at any time after the organized control of the disposal site is stipulated. The annual effective
dose of unintentional intruders who are continuously exposed does not exceed 1 mSv, and theeffective dose for a single acute exposure does not more than 5 mSv.
Requirements for siting
The safety analysis report and the environmental impact report must be included in theapproval documents for the declaration of the site. The report shall include the following maincontents: (1) the implementation of the safety requirements involved in relevant national
standards, existing problems and measures should be taken; (2) analyzing of the quantity andprobability that radionuclides may be transferred from the repository to the human andenvironment, the mechanism, pathway and rate of radionuclides to human body, initiallyestimating the personal dose equivalent and collective dose equivalent of the public in thenormal state, natural and man-made events, and making safety assessments; (3) pre-analyzing
and evaluating the environmental impact of the LLW repository at various stages, such as
construction, operation and shutdown, and the impact that the surrounding environment may
have on the LLW repository.
27

China-General

Requirements for designing
The preliminary design stage of the LLW repository shall have design documents of safety
analysis and environmental protection, which shall include two main contents: (1) discussing
the engineering measures should be taken and their reliability to achieve the standard
requirements; (2) further demonstrating the contents of the safety analysis report andenvironmental impact report at the siting stage, the dose equivalents of the public and workers
during the operational phase and the dose equivalents received by the public of post-closure
should be estimated based on the design parameters, and consideration and evaluation of harms
to the environment and humans also should be taken when natural and man-made eventsoccurred.
Requirements for operation and shutdown phases
Before the operation and shutdown of LLW repository, the approval procedures must be
performed in accordance with national regulations.
The division of the three stages of “closure”, “semi-closure” and “open” during the postclosure of the LLW repository shall be subject to safety analysis and evaluation, and may only
be implemented after approval by the national environmental protection department.
During the operation, closure, and semi-closure phases of the LLW repository, theenvironmental quality shall be evaluated periodically according to the data of environmental
monitoring. Since anomalies caused by man-made or natural events affect the expectedfunction of the LLW repository, they should be analyzed and evaluated in a timely manner, andreported to the national and local environmental protection departments.

3.

Regulatory and Operational System Preparation

Legal framework
A legal framework comprised of national laws, administrative regulations, departmental
rules (national standards), management guides and reference legal instruments governing
radioactive waste management has been established and maintained in China. Implementationof these instruments can provide the protection of individuals, society and the environment.
These documents were developed and issued after stringent review by relevant authorities
including regulatory control department. These set out the specific requirements for every stepin radioactive waste management and criteria for protection of the public, the workers and theenvironment in respect of several main links in waste management (including the disposal ofsolid radioactive waste and the release of radioactive effluents), which are basically consistent
with internationally endorsed standards and criteria. The MEE/NNSA, alongside with thecompetent authorities of nuclear facilities, shall conduct regulatory control and supervisory
monitoring of compliance of such facilities with standards.
28

China-General

Waste acceptance requirements“Safety requirement for near surface disposal of low and medium level radioactive solid
waste” (GB 9132-2018) stipulate the generanl requirements of waste form, waste package andacceptance. The filling of LILW waste package, package container, surface radiation level,surface contamination, transportation, disposal, emergency plan and quality assurance werealso regulated in “Standard of safety for low and intermediate level solid radioactive waste
packages” (GB12711-2018)
4.

Site Selection

Siting of solid radioactive waste disposal facilities
China attaches high priority to the siting of radioactive waste management facilities, withthe relevant regulations and standards being developed to guide the siting of different
radioactive waste management facilities.
The site-related factors were evaluated during the siting of solid radioactive waste disposal
facility, involving earthquake, regional stability, geological structure and lithology, engineering
geology, hydrogeology, mineral resources, natural and cultural resources, population density,
surface water and drinking water, urban, airports, and the distance away from the inflammableand explosive dangerous goods warehouse etc.
The impacts of such facilities on individual, the society and the public were evaluated,with account taken of the post-closure evolution of the site condition. Under our national
standards, analyses were made, in the process of siting, of amounts and probability of migrationof radionuclides into human environment, associated mechanisms, pathway, and velocity ofradionuclide into human body, together with estimating initially the individual dose equivalentand collective dose equivalent under normal conditions, natural and artificial events, and alsopreliminarily analyzing and evaluating the environmental impacts of disposal facilities during
construction, operation and post closure, and the possible impacts of the surrounding
environment on disposal facilities.
Public Communication and Information Publicity
Prior to submitting the environmental impact statement to the Ministry of Ecology andEnvironmental/National Nuclear Safety Administration (MEE/NNSA), the applicants ofconstruction projects, including the projects of radioactive waste management facility, should
legally disclose the full text of information. Having accepted the said environmental impact
statement, the MEE/NNSA should make the full text of information available to the public
legally and should make its comment public on either approving or disapproving theenvironmental impact statement. After having approved such project, the MEE/NNSA shallopen to the society the licensing process.
29

China-General

The MEE/NNSA issued in 2015 the Work Program on Public Communication of Nuclear
and Radiation Safety and the Work Guidance on Public Communication of Nuclear Technology
Application (trial), with a view to enhancing popular science dissemination, information
disclosure and public involvement. Science 2015, MEE/NNSA, National Energy
Administration (NEA) and China Atomic Energy Authority (CAEA) provide every year theperiodic guidance on the activity of nuclear industry Open Days.
The building of information publicity channel is underway. The major platforms are the
MEE/NNSA’s information website and CAEA’s and NEA’s websites. Additional channels
include China Environmental Status Bulletin, China Environmental Yearbook, NNSA’s Annual
Report, Annual Report on Environmental Radiation Monitoring, China Environmental Paper,
radio and television, network website, as well as other media and channels.
5.

Design and Construction of Disposal Facilities

Design and Construction of LILW Disposal Site
To limit possible radiological impacts to individuals, the society and the environment, thefollowing measures were mainly considered and taken in the design and construction of LILW
disposal sites:(1) multiple barriers, consisting of engineering barrier (waste forms, container, disposal
structure, and backfilling materials) and natural barrier, are developed and provided;(2) proper waterproof and drainage systems are set; the engineering barrier is set toprevent the infiltration of groundwater and surface water in such a way as to minimize thecontact of waste with water; waterproof design is focused on preventing surface water andrainwater from infiltration into disposal units; permeability and absorbability of rocks, surface
runoff and ground water table and other site characteristics are considered in design of sitewaterproof; the design of drainage system can ensure the timely drainage of impounded wateron the ground at site and in disposal units;(3) in addition to drainage and waterproof, the design of disposal site also involves unit
backfilling, overburden structure, surface treatment, and plantation; the holes and channels tomonitor groundwater are installed in the vicinity of disposal units and proper locations onsite;(4) disposal units are arranged in line with the overall plan, including access, walkways,
contaminated area and non-contaminated area;(5) waste acceptance zones are equipped with detection instrumentations for measuringdose rate, surface contamination, cargo certificate of vehicle and cask; inspection device forunloaded waste drum (box); radiation monitoring and warning systems; installations to treat30

China-General

damaged containers: devices for transportation equipment decontamination, and facility to treat
waste generated from decontamination; and(6) laboratories are established for conducting routine analysis of water, soils, air and plant
samples; individual decontamination, individual and environmental monitoring,
instrumentation and equipment maintenance, and equipment decontamination.
The LILW treatment facilities currently in operation have been provided in design phasewith technical preparation measures to enable such facilities to be closed. These includes buffer
areas between disposal unit and disposal site boundary, underwater monitoring wells set in an
appropriate location in buffer areas, on-site laboratories for analysis of samples from water,
soils, air, animal and plant. In so doing, the analysis of on-site and ambient environmental
safety may become available. Additionally, in accordance with design requirements, theenough distance should be left between the top level of disposed waste and disposal facility
overburden layer. If necessary, anti-intrusion barrier needs to be established where protection
can be provided to an unintentional intruder within institutional controls period. Overburden
layer shall be designed so as to control water seepage to as low as practically feasible and as tolead infiltrated or surface water to the outside of disposal unit and to protect them from erosion
due to geological process and biological activities.
Operation of LILW Disposal Site
The basic principles
The operation of the disposal site shall ensure that the radiation dose of its workers islower than the national standard, and other safety shall also comply with national regulations.
The processing of volume reduction and solidification of wastes should, in principle, becompleted before being sent to the disposal site.
Waste acceptance and handlingAfter the waste is transported to the disposal site, it must be inspected to confirm that thewaste package meets the packaging requirements, is not damaged during transportation, and isfully consistent with the contents of the waste card being filled. The format of the waste cardshould be approved by the waste receiving department. The waste card is filled out by the waste
generation unit and is responsible for its content.
The disposal site should have suitable handling equipment and appliances, such as cranes,
forklifts, remote control hooks, etc. These equipment and appliances should be compatible withthe handling and transportation methods.
Operation of waste disposal
The operator of the disposal site must abide by the provisions in the operating permit and31

China-Generalformulate corresponding operating procedures as required.
Disposal operations for waste include the handling, placement of the waste, and theclosure of disposal units. The safety of the workers and the public should be ensured throughout
the disposal operation.
The placement of the waste should facilitate the closure of the disposal unit and should
not adversely affect the safety isolation.
The operation file of waste disposal should include the date and location of the waste
disposal, as well as the basic data of the waste, such as the serial number of the waste barrel ortank, the origin, the main radionuclide in the waste, the total activity and activity concentration,
the radiation level, the volume and weight of the waste, and the problems with the disposal
operation. The operator of the disposal site shall be responsible for the safekeeping of theoperational files, and copies of them shall be deposited with the relevant departments as
required.
A permanent sign shall be established at the appropriate location near the waste disposalsite and disposal unit to indicate where the waste is buried and related matters.
Supervision of operation
The operator of the disposal site shall be responsible for the daily monitoring of the onsite environment, which shall include: (1) measurement of surface contamination; (2)measuring and analyzing the groundwater samples; and (3) measuring and analyzing thesurface and a certain depth of the rock and soil sample; 4) measuring and analyzing the plant
samples; (5) measuring and analyzing the air samples; (6) radiation monitoring; (7) periodic
inspection of the integrity of the top cover of the disposal unit.
The external environmental monitoring plan of the disposal site shall be implemented
independently by the local environmental protection department and the disposal site operator.
The results of environmental monitoring should be reported regularly to national and local
environmental protection agencies. If abnormal conditions are found, they should be reported
immediately and truthfully. The operator shall regularly evaluate the monitoring results andreport them according to regulations.
Abnormal situation
The disposal site shall have emergency measures and remedies to deal with the following
abnormal conditions, such as unclear waste cards, unqualified or broken waste packaging,
scattered waste, and abnormal release of radioactive materials, preventing or minimizing the
diffusion of pollution.

32

China-GeneralIn the event of an accident that may cause pollution, the operator of the disposal site shalldetermine the location, nuclide, level, scope and process of the pollution as soon as possible so
as to determine the remedial measures should be taken. If the accident is so serious that thedisposal unit must be opened, a careful plan should be made in advance and necessary measures
should be taken to limit the spread of pollution (including air pollution, water pollution andmaterial contamination).
If there is evidence that the environment has been contaminated, the operator should be
responsible for completing the entire pollution abatement action under the supervision of thenational and local environmental protection departments, and investigate the cause of thepollution.
The conditions of closure
The disposal site shall be normally closed when the amount of waste allowed to bedisposed of by the operating permit or the total radioactive limit has been reached.
When it is found that the design of the disposal system or siting has uncorrectable errors,
or serious accidents occurred, or unforeseen natural disasters making the disposal site no longer
suitable for disposal of radioactive waste, the disposal site should be closed abnormally.
Unusual closures should be planned in advance. The implementation of abnormal closure must
be approved by the national environmental protection department.
Post-closure phase
After the disposal site is closed, control shall still be carried out within the prescribed
control period of the site to ensure that it meets the radiation protection requirements and has
no adverse impact on the environment, and that no intrusion to the disposal site occurs during
this period.
After the disposal site is closed, it generally goes through three stages:(1) The closed phase. The disposal site that has just been closed should maintaining closed
status and can only enter the site for supervision work;(2) Semi-closed stage. When it is proved that the hazard of the waste is very small, andthe covering of the waste is intact, it is allowed to enter the site, but excavation or drilling is
not allowed;(3) Open stage. After reaching the specified site control period, the radioactivity of thewaste has dropped to a level that does not require radiation protection, and it has been verified
that the site can be fully opened.
National and local environmental protection agencies should agree with the relevant
33China-General

departments to manage and implement the tasks after the closure of the disposal site.
The cost of maintenance, monitoring and emergency measures after the closure of thedisposal site shall be budgeted prior to the operation of the disposal site and shall be drawn
from a certain percentage of the charges for disposal of the waste. In order to accommodate thevarious changes that may be encountered, the cost should be re-estimated from time to timeand necessary adjustments also should be made.
Supervision
Supervision after the closure of the disposal site, such as environmental monitoring,
restricted access, facility maintenance, archival preservation, and possible emergency actions,should be carried out with the participation of national and local environmental protection
agencies.

34

China-Specific-Part II. Specific Site Safety Assessment of LLW Repository1.

General Considerations for Safety Assessment

Solid radioactive waste shall be disposed of in accordance with their classification. Solid
low- and intermediate-level radioactive waste (LILW) shall be disposed of in near-surface orintermediate depth disposal facilities. Solid high level radioactive waste (HLW) waste shall bedisposed of in a centralized deep geological disposal repository. Wastes arising from uranium(thorium) mining and milling tend to be in relatively-centralized in-situ landfill.
In order to estimate the functions of the LILW repository, safety analysis andenvironmental impact assessment must be performed when selecting a plan, determining thesite, designing, operating, and shutting down the site.
Requirements for siting
The safety analysis report and the environmental impact report must be included in theapproval documents for the declaration of the site. The report shall include the following maincontents: (1) the implementation of the safety requirements involved in relevant national
standards, existing problems and measures should be taken; (2) analyzing of the quantity andprobability that radionuclides may be transferred from the repository to the human andenvironment, the mechanism, pathway and rate of radionuclides to human body, initiallyestimating the personal dose equivalent and collective dose equivalent of the public in thenormal state, natural and man-made events, and making safety assessments; (3) pre-analyzing
and evaluating the environmental impact of the LILW repository at various stages, such as
construction, operation and shutdown, and the impact that the surrounding environment may
have on the LILW repository.
Requirements for designing
The preliminary design stage of the LILW repository shall have design documents ofsafety analysis and environmental protection, which shall include two main contents: (1)discussing the engineering measures should be taken and their reliability to achieve thestandard requirements; (2) further demonstrating the contents of the safety analysis report andenvironmental impact report at the siting stage, the dose equivalents of the public and workers
during the operational phase and the dose equivalents received by the public of post-closure
should be estimated based on the design parameters, and consideration and evaluation of harms
to the environment and humans also should be taken when natural and man-made eventsoccurred.
Requirements for operation and shutdown phases
Before the operation and shutdown of LILW repository, the approval procedures must be
performed in accordance with national regulations.
35

China-Specific

The division of the three stages of “closure”, “semi-closure” and “open” during the postclosure of the LILW repository shall be subject to safety analysis and evaluation, and may only
be implemented after approval by the national environmental protection department.
During the operation, closure, and semi-closure phases of the LILW repository, theenvironmental quality shall be evaluated periodically according to the data of environmental
monitoring. Since anomalies caused by man-made or natural events affect the expectedfunction of the LILW repository, they should be analyzed and evaluated in a timely manner,and reported to the national and local environmental protection departments.
2.

Specific LILW Repository site (planning etc.)

There are currently two solid LILW disposal sites in operation in China. The following
table is an introduction to the Guangdong Beilong disposal site.
Name

Capacity(m3)

Operation
Period(year)

Total Radioactivity(Bq)

Land Area(m2)

Guangdong
Beilong Disposal
Site

80,00040

5.4×1015

205,000

It mainly disposes solid LILW waste generated by the operation of nuclear power plants
in Daya Bay Nuclear Power Station Base, Guangdong Province and adjacent areas ofGuangdong, as well as urban radioactive waste.
A total of 70 disposal units were designed at the Beilong disposal site. The size of each
unit was 17×17×7 m, the space utilization rate was 57.2%, and each unit could dispose of
1157m3 waste.
The disposal unit is a reinforced concrete structure with a base plate thickness of 700 mm,
the side wall thickness is 400 mm, the top plate thickness is 500-1000 mm, and the strength
grade is C40. The stainless steel drain pipe is embedded in the center of the bottom of therepository and connected to the drain pipe of gallery below, which can effectively exclude thewater entering into the repository. After the disposal repository is full with waste, the top plateis covered with a 5m thick multi-layer structure covering, which have the functions ofwaterproof, preventing animal holes and deep root plants and unintentional intrusion. There
are monitoring wells around the repository, and a sampling port for the dialysis water isarranged in the underground pipe gallery, which can timely monitor whether the repository has
leakage and the impact of leakage on the environment.
The location of Beilong disposal site is mainly composed of weathering products of light36

China-Specificgray thick layer metamorphic medium-fine sandstone fine-thin metamorphic argillaceous
sandstone with poor water permeability. There are small-scale inactive faults near the site, but
generally the filling is better and the water conductivity is poor, it does not have a significant
impact on the nuclides resisting capacity of the disposal site.
According to the design data, the occupational exposure of each type of work under thenormal operation of the disposal site does not exceed 5 mSv/a, and the annual collective dose
does not exceed 4.7×10-2 people▪Sv.
If a accident of transportation vehicle fires and explodes is occurred during the operation of
the disposal site, the maximum immersion radiation of the residents may not exceed 2.6×10-12
Sv, the maximum internal exposure of inhalation shall not exceed 2.8×10-10 Sv, and the externalradiation of the surface deposition shall not exceed 1.3×10-12 Sv.
At the post-closure phase of disposal site, under normal conditions, only 3H and 14C in 500a
can pass through the unsaturated zone to enter groundwater and streams. The maximum doseof drinking water for children is no more than 4.5×10-7 Sv/a, and the maximum dose of ingested
seafood is not more than 2.0×10-11 Sv/a. The other nuclides can be blocked in the unsaturated
zone. If the engineering barrier fails, the drainage facilities and the blind ditch are blocked, theradionuclides are soaked in the groundwater for one month when the maximum release
concentration of the radionuclides are at the bottom of the repository. The maximum dose ofdrinking water for children is no more than 5.2×10-7 Sv/a. The maximum dose of seafood does
not exceed 2.8×10-11 Sv/a, and the main contributing nuclides are 3H and 14C.
After the disposal site is closed for 100 years, the public's unintentional intrusion into thedisposal site for constructing houses will not exceed 1.8×10-5 Sv/a, and the main contribution
is 137Cs. The total of external exposure of the borehole and the inhalation of the internalradiation shall not exceed 3.6×10-6 Sv/a, and the main contribution is 137Cs and 239Pu. After
drilling, the external dose of polluted soil, the inhalation of suspended materials, the ingestionof contaminated vegetables, and the total external dose of housing construction do not exceed
7.9×10-5 Sv/a. The maximum dose of well drinking does not exceed 2.2×10-7 Sv/a.
After a large number of tests, simulations and calculations, the results show that in the normal
operation of the Beilong disposal site, only a small amount of radionuclides will be released
into the environment, and the resulting public additional dose equivalent is far lower than thenational limits and the management target values determined by the disposal site, so thedisposal site will not have an unacceptable impact on the environment.

37

China-Specific3.

Guidelines for Safety Assessment

Data acquisition program
Data acquisition mainly includes environmental data of site, disposal site data and thestatus of environmental quality data.
Environmental data of site includes geographic location data, population distribution data,
land use and resource profile data, meteorological data, hydrological data, geological andgeomorphological data, and hydrogeological condition data.
Disposal site data includes disposal objects, disposal site planning and layout, waste
disposal related data, and auxiliary facility data.
The status of environmental quality data includes the background value of radiation
environment and the non-radioactive environment of the disposal site and nearby areas, andthe environmental impact data of the nuclear power plant on the disposal site nearby.
Pre-operational, operational and post-closure monitoring
After the design of the disposal site is completed, at least one systematic environmental
monitoring of the site should be carried out before the operation of disposal. The specificmonitoring items include groundwater level, environmental radiation level of gamma, soil,
groundwater, surface water, seawater, sediment, crops and air. In addition to environmental
radiation level of gamma, the gamma spectrum analysis of aerosol; analysis of 3H and 14C forgas sample; analysis of 60Co, 90Sr, 137Cs, 14C, 63Ni, 3H, 239+240Pu for water sample; soil, sediment,
crops, seawater and seafood gamma spectrum and analysis for 90Sr and 137Cs also should be
carried out.
The monitors of radioactivity for the site, buffer zone and surrounding environment should
be carried out during the operation period of disposal site. The monitoring items are
groundwater level, gamma radiation level of environment, groundwater, repository drainage,
surface water, air, soil, sediment, crops and seafood. The monitoring focuses on external
drainage and groundwater, and the key nuclides are 3H and 90Sr.
The post-closure monitoring of disposal site is divided into two phases. In the first phase,the monitoring plan is basically the same with operation phase, the monitoring time is 5-10a,and the monitoring purpose is to evaluate the stability of the waste form, the reliability of thedisposal facility and the effectiveness of the shutdown measures. The focus of the monitoringis on the drainage of the disposal unit and the groundwater in the site. The second phase
continues until the end of the active monitoring period. The purpose of the monitoring is todetermine the long-term impact of the disposal site and to verify whether the environmental
impact of the disposal of the radioactive waste complies with national regulations. The
38

China-Specificmonitoring content is mainly 3H and 90Sr in the early stage, and 14C and 137Cs in the later stage.
Long-term monitoring can identify problems that may arise in the disposal system in a timely
manner in order to take appropriate remedial measures. If the monitoring results indicate thatthe disposal facility is stable and reliable, the monitoring plan can be appropriately adjusted togradually reduce the frequency of monitoring and sampling points.
Scenario analysis, pathways
According to the environment and the design of the disposal site, the release ofradionuclides and possible unintentional intrusion into the Beilong disposal site during normal
operation, accidents, shutdown, and long-term isolation after shutdown of the disposal site arecalculated and predicted. The impact that may be on the staff, the public and the environmentis also calculated and predicted.
Under normal operating conditions, the disposal site will produce occupational exposure
to workers during the process of waste receiving inspection, hoisting and stacking, monitoring,backfilling and equipment maintenance.
There are two main types of accidents that may occur during the operation of the disposalsite. A vehicle that transports waste fires or explodes and a waste container falls into an
unsealed disposal unit during the lifting process.
After the disposal site is closed, it is considered that the performance of the artificial
barrier will gradually deteriorate with the passage of time. Due to the infiltration of water, thenuclides will be leached from the waste form, and then released to the bottom of repository
through the package, the backfill material and the bottom of the disposal unit, thereafter carriedby groundwater, surface water, and finally to the bay.
The scenarios of unintentional intrusion after the monitoring period are mainly based on
the residential scenario, the drilling scenario, the post-drilling scenario and the well-drinking
scenario.
Each of the above scenarios has its own specific pathway of radionuclide transmission.
Due to the many transmission routes, only the post-drilling scenario is taken as an example.
The cores drilled by the drilling make the radioactive wastes distributed within a certain range,
so that the intruders are affected irradiation. The irradiation route includes internal irradiationof inhalation by re-suspended contaminated soil, direct external irradiation of contaminatedsoil, internal irradiation caused by vegetables grown on contaminated soil, and external
irradiation of building houses on contaminated soil.
Conceptual and mathematical modelSpecific conceptual and mathematical models should be considered for each scenario. The
39

China-Specificfollowing is a description of the conceptual and mathematical models of a vehicle thattransports waste during a fire or explosion scenario during operation.
Conceptual model
The fire or explosion accident of vehicles transporting waste is characterized bysuddenness and short duration. When calculating the time integral air concentration, as a more
safety consideration, the radioactive release during the accident is regarded as a series of puff
release. The composition is treated according to the release of the ground source, and the puff
release period is 30s. Assuming an accident time of 20 minutes, a total of 40 puffs are released
during the accident. The quasi-static wind state model and the wind model were used to
calculate the nuclide concentrations at 1 m, 20 m and 5000 m, respectively.
Mathematical model
For the calculation points leaving the release point distance x=1 m and 20 m, the quasistatic wind state is adopted, and the static wind puff mode with uniform distribution ofomnidirectional concentration is adopted:
2𝑄 ∆𝑡
𝐶 x, t2𝜋𝑥𝑉 ∗ 𝜎 𝑡
For residential areas at x=5000m, treat them in a windy puff mode:
𝑄 ∆𝑡
𝑥
𝑡 𝑡 𝑢
𝑒𝑥𝑝
𝐶 𝑥, 𝑡 𝑡
2𝜎
2𝜋
𝜎 𝜎 𝜎
Consequence analysis
The external exposure dose and the inhalation internal dose according to the calculated
nuclide concentration of the mathematical model should be evaluated, and then comparing with
the nationally specified limits, and finally the conclusions of safety analysis and environmental
assessment should be given. The problems in the facility and the corresponding measures thatshould be taken to improve the quality of safety should also be pointed out.
4.

Confidence Building

Verification, calibration and validation of models
Taking a fire or explosion scenario of a vehicle transporting waste as an example, theresults calculated by the wind tunnel experiment and the mathematical model are compared
and analyzed to verify the accuracy of the model.
Quality assurance
The operators all prepared and have been implementing respective QA programs in siting,designing, construction and operation of the disposal sites, with representation of the QA
inclusions and requirements for closure and post-closure institutional control period.
40

China-Specific

The MEE/NNSA review and accept the QA programs and other types of safety related
important documents, including their important revisions, as required of QA, safety regulations
and other types of safety related guides; supervise the implementation of the QA program withrespect to nuclear safety; selecting control points of the related quality plans in respect of thesafety and quality-related major activities and overseeing them on-site; organizing technicalreview and demonstration of the results of such activities; organize technical review of major
non-conformance and oversee effectively the process of addressing such non-conformance.
Peer review of safety assessments
The reports of safety analysis and environmental impact assessment are subject to expert
review prior to submission to the regulatory body to ensure the accuracy of the reports.

41

INDONESIA

42

Indonesia-General

INDONESIA-Part I. General Outline of LLW Repository1.

General Policy

1) Legal Framework
Indonesia has issued the Act of the Republic of Indonesia No. 10/1997 on Nuclear Energy
Since April 1997, issued. This law covers various arrangements, including the establishmentof Nuclear Energy Regulatory Agency (NERA) by the Presidential Decree No. 76/1998 in May
1998, the basic principles of the regulation practices in the application of nuclear energy, thebasic arrangement of waste management and the liability of nuclear damage. The Act No.
10/1997 on Nuclear Energy consists of 10 chapters with 48 articles. The provision on the waste
management consists of 6 articles. With regard to the waste management, the Act clearlystipulates that no part of the Indonesian territory could be used as sites for any foreign or othercountry radioactive waste repository.
As stated earlier, the Act No. 10/1997 on Nuclear Energy also stipulates some basic
arrangements for waste management. The basic arrangement is accommodated in Chapter VI
in 6 articles. It stipulates inter alia:a) The radioactive waste management shall be conducted to mitigate radiation hazards tothe workers, the public and the environment (Article 22(1))b) The Executing Body (in this case BATAN) shall accomplish the radioactive waste
management, for doing which it may designate a state or private company or cooperative
to conduct commercial waste management activity (Article 23)c) The user generating low and intermediate level of radioactive waste shall obligate tocollect, segregate, or treat and temporarily store the waste before being transferred to the
Executing Body (Article 24 (1)).
d) The radioactive waste storage in the premise of the Executing Body shall be subjected
for fee and the amount of which will be stipulated in a Degree of The Minister of Finance(Article 26)e) The transportation and storage of radioactive waste shall consider the safety of workers,
public and environment (Article 27 (1))f) The provisions on radioactive waste management including the waste transportation anddisposal shall be further implemented in Government Regulation (Article 27 (2))
With respect to high level radioactive waste (HLW) management, the Act sets forth thefollowing provisions:43

Indonesia-Generala) Nuclear material consists of nuclear ores, nuclear fuel, and spent fuel. Spent fuel isconsidered as HLW (Article 2 (1) and its elucidation)b) The user generating HLW shall be obligated to temporarily store those wastes during theperiod not less than the life time of the nuclear reactor before being transferred to the
Executing Body (Article 24 (2))
Government Regulation No. 61/2013 on Radioactive Waste Management states that:a) BATAN carries out the disposal of disused sealed radioactive material that has been
determined as radioactive waste as referred to in Article 12 paragraph (3) letter c.
b) Disposal as referred to in paragraph (1) is carried out at: near surface disposal; or medium depth disposal.
c) Construction, operation and closure of disposal facilities as referred to in paragraph (2)must have permission from the Chairman of BAPETEN.
2) Safety Objective
Radioactive waste is potentially hazardous and it must be managed in ways that ensure
the protection of the public and the environment for as long as it remains hazardous. Two basic
objectives of safe waste disposal should be taken into consideration, namely:a) To protect human being and his environment from harmful effect of radioactive wasteb) To dispose of the waste in such a way that the transfer of responsibility of waste
management to the future generations is minimized.
3) Disposal Strategy
As stated in Government Regulation No.61/2013, BATAN carries out the disposal of
disused sealed radioactive material that has been determined as radioactive waste. Disposal is
carried out by near surface disposal or medium depth disposal. BATAN has designed the nearsurface disposal for the radioactive waste level near to clearance level. BATAN also has a plan
to design a borehole disposal for DSRS. Based on the elucidation of Act No.10/1997 on Nuclear
Energy, it is prohibited the use of any the use of any part of Indonesian territory for any foreignor other country radioactive waste repository.
Indonesia conducts the disposal study for near surface and deep geological facilities since1989. Site investigation has been done, and two universities were involved in the preliminary
study. The locations for this activity include some uninhabited islands with the characteristicof basaltic rock, andesitic rock that suitable for the high level waste, and in Java with thecharacteristic of volcanic host rock, clay host rock. Some locations have been considered as
the suitable media for isolating the waste; however some more studies, especially on
44Indonesia-Generaldemography change, socio-economical impact, and also political trend must be reviewed.
4) Radioactive Waste Management Plan
The main principles of management of low and intermediate level radioactive wastes are
summarized as: minimization of wastes, collection of waste conforming the categories, volume
reduction, solidification and stabilization, reliable packaging, in-situ interim storage, safe
transportation, and final disposal.
The radioactive waste produced by Bandung and Yogyakarta Nuclear Research Centers issmall in quantity with low level activity and mostly contain short-life radionuclides. The
treatment of aqueous waste in Bandung and Yogyakarta Nuclear Research Center is simple, i.e.,
by collection of wastes in the hold-up tank for further decay, down to insignificant activity andallowed to be discharged into a river. The solid and organic liquid wastes are collected in thecontainers, kept and stored in storage facilities for radioactivity to decay.
The Serpong Nuclear Research Complex which is comprising some waste generating
facilities belonging to the Multipurpose Reactor Center, Nuclear Fuel Technology Center,
Radioactive Waste Technology Center, Radioisotopes and Radiopharmaceuticals Center,
generates a larger quantity of low and medium level waste. To deal with these wastes, the theRadioactive Waste Management Station (RWMS) was established in Serpong and started its
operation in 1989. The RWMS is under the management of the Center for Radioactive Waste
Technology (CRWT). The Center is assigned responsible for the ultimate management ofradioactive waste generated from the whole territory of the Republic of Indonesia.
The radioactive wastes from outside of BATAN are mostly resulted from activities innuclear medicine/hospital (spent sources, liquid waste), industrial application (spent sources
for radiography, logging and gauging, lightning protection devices), and research institute.
The basic policy of waste management in Indonesia is as follows:a) Radioactive waste generation from the use of nuclear energy should be as minimum as
possible.
b) Any discharge of liquid effluent and gas effluent to the environment should be as low as
possible.
c) Handling, treatment and disposal of radioactive wastes should be carried out by taking
into account the environment protection consideration.
d) Conditioning wastes should be emplaced at nuclear site and specially constructed for thispurpose.
e) Research and development in radioactive waste management should be carried out tosupport the safety aspect of present and future nuclear energy program.
45

Indonesia-General2.

Principles and Safety Assessment

1) Fundamental safety principles
The safety objective and the fundamental safety principles established in IAEA Safety
Fundamental apply for all facilities and activities in which radioactive waste is generated or
managed, and for the entire lifetime of such facilities, including planning, siting, design,
manufacturing, construction, commissioning, operation, shutdown and decommissioning. This
includes the associated transport of radioactive material and the management of radioactive
waste.
In controlling the radiological and non-radiological hazards associated with radioactive
waste, the following aspects have also to be considered: conventional health and safety issues,radiation risks that may transcend national borders, and the potential impacts and burdens on
future generations arising from long periods of storage of radioactive waste.
The safety requirements for the protection of human health and the environment apply tothe management of radioactive waste generated in medicine, industry and research and otheractivities. Waste is required to be managed so as to protect human health and the environment
now and in the future without imposing undue burdens on future generations. Public exposuresthat arise from materials removed from controlled environments, from the discharge of
effluents containing radionuclides, from accidental releases and from the transport ofradioactive waste in the public domain are also required to be controlled.
2) Safety Criteria
Based on the Government Regulation No. 33/2007 on Safety of Ionizing Radiation and
Security of Radioactive Sources, the dose limit in Indonesia as in Table 1. Dose constraint in
the facility could be decided by the permit holder with the approval of Nuclear Energy
Regulatory Agency (BAPETEN).
Table 1. Dose Limits in Indonesia

Type of Dose Limit
Effective Dose

Limit on Dose from
Occupational Exposure

Limit on Dose from Public
Exposure

20 mSv per year, averaged
over defined periods of 5
years, with no single year
exceeding 50 mSv

1 mSv in a year. a higher value
could be allowed in a single year,
provided that the average over 5
years does not exceed 1 mSv per
year

Equivalent Dose to the 20 mSv per year, averaged
Lens of the Eyeover defined periods of 5
years, with no single year46

15 mSv in a year

Indonesia-General

exceeding 50 mSv
Equivalent Dose to the 500 mSv in a year
Skin (Averaged over 1
cm2 of skin regardlessof the area exposed)

50 mSv in a year

Equivalent Dose to the 500 mSv in a year
Hands and Feet
3) Formulation Safety Assessment
A safety assessment has to be carried out at the design stage for a new facility or activity,
or as early as possible in the lifetime of an existing facility or activity. For facilities andactivities that continue over long periods of time, the safety assessment needs to be updated asnecessary through the stages of the lifetime of the facility or activity, so as to take into accountpossible changes in circumstances (such as the application of new standards or new scientificand technological developments), changes in site characteristics, and modifications to thedesign or operation, and also the effects of ageing.
The safety assessment has to address all radiation risks that arise from normal operation(that is, when the facility is operating normally or the activity is being carried out normally)and from anticipated operational occurrences and accident conditions (in which failures orinternal or external events have occurred that challenge the safety of the facility or activity).
The safety assessment for anticipated operational occurrences and accident conditions also has
to address failures that might occur and the consequences of any failures.
The safety assessment has to include a safety analysis, which consists of a set of different
quantitative analyses for evaluating and assessing challenges to safety in various operational
states, anticipated operational occurrences and accident conditions, by means of deterministic
and also probabilistic methods.
4) Long term safety of RW repository
The safety assessment has to address radiation risks in the present and in the long term.
This is particularly important for activities such as the management of radioactive waste, theeffects of which could span many generations.
To ensure of human and environmental safety against potential radiological impacts inoperation and post-closure of disposal facilities, the quality of the treated waste must meet thechemical, physical, mechanical and radiation requirements or criteria. This requirement isnecessary for treated, conditioned and packaged waste to ensure that the waste will be resistantin the long term period, so that, they will not damaged, cracked, or broken. In addition, the site47

Indonesia-Generalcharacteristic as a natural barrier, and engineered barrier of disposal facility are part of thedesign that must be evaluated to ensure the safety.
5) Monitoring and Institutional Control
Institutional control is an important safety component for surface disposal facilities ornear surface disposal facilities for preventing human intrusion for a certain period of time.
Institutional control is usually required for achieving the safety objective and should remain inplace as long as the waste remains potentially hazardous (e.g. 300 years). Waste containing
appreciable amounts of long lived radionuclides should be disposed of at greater depths.
Institutional control should be seen as a component of the overall system of protection
against the hazards of radioactive waste. This is consistent with the general defence in depth
concept, as it adds a layer of protection to the natural and engineered barriers of the facility.
However, the presence of institutional control should not be used to justify a reduction in thelevel of design performance of the containment and isolation system.
3.

Regulatory and Operational System Preparation

1) Existing of regulatory framework for Radioactive Waste Repositorya) Act Number 10/1997 on Nuclear Energyb) Act Number 32/2009 on Protection and Management of the Environmentc) Government Regulation No. 61/2013 on Radioactive Waste Managementd) Government Regulation No. 33/2007 on Safety of Ionizing Radiation and Security ofRadioactive Sourcese) Government Regulation No. 2/2014 on the Licensing of Nuclear Installation and theUtilization of Nuclear Materialsf) Government Regulation No. 54/2012 on the Safety and Security of Nuclear Installations;g) Government Regulation No. 26/2002 on the Transport Safety of Radioactive Materials;h) Government Regulation No. 27/2012 on Environmental Permit;i) Government Regulation No. 101/2014 on Management of Hazardous and Toxic Material
Waste;j) Decree of the Chairman of the Nuclear Energy Regulatory Agency No.07/2017 on
Radioactivity Limit in the Environment;k) Decree of the Chairman of the Nuclear Energy Regulatory Agency No.09/2009 on
Intervention of Exposure from TENORM;l) Decree of the Minister of Forestry and Environment No. P.38/2019 on Types of Business
Plan and/or Activities that must have Analysis of the Impact of the Environment;m) Decree of the Minister of Forestry and Environment No. P.63/2016 on Requirement andProcedures for Storage of Hazardous and Toxic Material Waste in Final Disposal Facility.
48

Indonesia-General

2) Responsibility to Construct and Develop and Operate of Waste Repository
Based on the Government Regulation No. 61/2013 on Radioactive Waste Management,
the radioactive disposal carries out by BATAN. The disposal types as referred to thisGovernment Regulation are near surface disposal and medium depth disposal. Construction,
operation and closure of disposal facilities must have permission from the Chairman of
BAPETEN.
4.

Site Selection

1) Site screening
At the stage of site investigation and site selection, the safety case should support theprocess leading to the identification of one or more potential disposal sites and should assist in
the progression to the next step of development. The safety case and its content will evolve as
the project develops in terms of engineering and in terms of characterization of the different
natural and engineered components of the disposal system. At this stage, the safety assessment
is initially generic in nature, but will evolve as the design develops and the level of detail ofthe site characterization increases. Criteria for rejecting a site and desirable characteristics fora site would be determined at this stage; the site characterization should be such that it ispossible to verify whether the desirable characteristics are present or to determine whether thesite should be rejected when compared to the criteria.
Selection of potential sites have been conducted in Indonesia based on IAEA Safety SeriesNo. 111-G-3.1. There are 4 steps for selecting the potential site, i.e.: 1) Conceptual and Planning
Stage, 2) Survey Area Stage, 3) Site Characterization Stage, and 4) Site Confirmation Stage.
Aspects of the study were considered in the selection of potential sites including topography,hydrology, geology, mineral resources, and land use/spatial planning. The method used in theselection of potential sites is buffering, scoring and overlay techniques. For disposal concepts
that can be applied (near surface disposal and deep geological disposal) in igneous rocks suchas granite, granodiorite and adamelite. Based on the R&D programs, BATAN has conducted
the investigation to obtain some potential sites in several area: Bangka Island, Banten Region(Serpong and Serang), West Java Region (Karawang - Sumedang), Central-East Java Region,
Genting Island, and Masalembo Island.
2) Site Criteriaa) Capable of Being Characterized
The ability of a site to provide long-term isolation of waste should be demonstrated byusing models and other analyses based on the characteristics of the site.
b) Population Distribution and Land Use
The candidate site should be located in an area of low population density where thepotential for future population growth is estimated to be quite limited.
49

Indonesia-Generalc) Natural Resources
Published or open file information on natural resources should be evaluated to determine
the potential impact on the site if natural resources were to be exploited.
d) Site Must Be Well Drained
A 100-year floodplain, coastal high-hazard areas, wetlands, or areas where flood
velocities could cause damage to the disposal facility are not suitable for waste disposal.
e) Depth to Water Table
Areas with a known or suspected high water table should be avoided. A disposal siteshould be sufficiently above the water table so that ground-water intrusion, perennial orotherwise, into the waste will not occur. Waste disposal should not be permitted in thezone of fluctuation of the water table.
f) Ground-Water Discharge
Areas are not suitable for LLW disposal if groundwater discharge features such as springs,
seeps, swamps, or bogs are present.
g) Tectonic and Geomorphic Processes
A site in a tectonically active area may have unfavorable conditions. Volcanism andhydrothermal activity may be unfavorable.
h) Adverse Impacts from Nearby Facilities
A candidate site should not be located near any facilities or activities that could adversely
affect the ability of the site to meet the performance objective. In addition, a candidate
site should not be located near facilities that could mask the site monitoring program.
3) Societal and political acceptability
Radioactive waste disposal should be accepted by the public near the disposal and also
the public where far from the site. Societal and political acceptability would be conducted inorder to find Environmental Permit via process of Environmental Impact Analysis. EIA would
be done in national level, not local or regional level.
5.

Design and Construction of Disposal Facilities

1) Funding
Since many of the activities associated with long term management of radioactive waste
will take place several decades (more) into the future (possibly after the generators of the waste
have gone out of business), it is prudent to collect the financial resources that will be needed
for future operations while the waste generators are still in operation. There are various
financial systems in the world to ensure the long term availability of financial resources fortheir disposal programs. Funds and reserves are the two most common financing systems. In
the former, the financial resources are usually maintained by organizations independent fromthe waste generators. In the Russian Federation, financing is obtained from the national budget.
50

Indonesia-General

The annual fees that are widely used to obtain the resources kept in the funds are generally
calculated and determined based on the amount of electricity or waste generated in a certain
year (i.e. on the basis of the future liability associated with the waste generated in that year).
The costs of dealing with the radioactive waste are built into electricity tariffs. For instance, in
the USA, consumers pay 0.1 cents per kilowatt-hour, which utilities pay into a special fund.
For Indonesia case the establishment for the radioactive waste funding system is necessary
after the government agree to build the NPP. Otherwise for non NPP, the funding for disposal
would be come from the national budget system.
2) Conceptual Design
The conceptual design phase of a near surface disposal project consists of a technical,
economic and safety evaluation of various disposal options. At this stage, a disposal site may
or may not have been selected. It is expected that the evaluation should show near surface
disposal is the most viable option, taking account of factors such as: safety (e.g. compliancewith the established safety principles and licensing requirements); environmental impact (e.g.
compatibility with the characteristics of available sites or of generic sites); technical issues (e.g.
ability to handle the amount and general characteristics of wastes that will be produced); socialand economic factors; and cost. The evaluation describes the intended disposal technicaloptions including the descriptions and functions of the waste package, buffer and barriermaterials proposed to be used, and the intended performance and safety functions assigned toeach of the components that comprise the multi-barrier system.
To carry out the conceptual design work, the following data are required:a) estimated waste inventory, general characteristics, and their places of origin;b) site characteristics (generic or specific), and data (geology, hydrology, hydrogeology,
geochemistry, climate, soil condition, etc.); andc) safety and regulatory criteria (operational and long term).
At this stage in the design process, there is generally a lack of specific information
regarding the site and/or the waste characteristics. At the conceptual phase of design, the safetyassessment often therefore has to use estimated waste inventory and characteristics, and genericsite characteristics. Sensitivity studies from the conceptual performance assessment can be
helpful in identifying information needed from site characterisation and from research
programmes on waste characteristics and engineered barriers.

51

Indonesia-General

3) Basic Engineering Design
The main objective of the basic engineering design phase is to confirm that the disposal
option selected from the conceptual design phase could become a licensable, operational option.
This is done by demonstrating that the disposal system meets all safety and design criteria andthat it can be constructed and operated in a safe and cost efficient manner. The results of thebasic engineering design phase are used in the safety assessment that, in many cases, is used,in this phase, in the licensing process.
The overall disposal system design normally includes basic design details for thefollowing:
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
g)
h)

location of the disposal site;facility layout;site preparation (excavation, drainage, earthwork, roads, etc.);
access and service roads, parking areas, fences;
run-off and disposal system drainage, collection point design and treatment of collectedliquids if warranted;
disposal system (engineered structures, pits, etc.);
definition of backfilling and capping systems (materials and description of emplacement
techniques);i) radiation protection and monitoring systems;j) power, heating, ventilation, communication and other support systems; andk) fire protection and security system.
In addition to the disposal system, auxiliary buildings and services need to be considered
for reception of waste, interim storage, conditioning or repackaging of waste, and preparationand storage of buffer, barrier, and construction materials. Additional buildings and services that
may be required and need consideration in the design include those with radioactive zone
restrictions (such as chemical and radiochemical laboratories, control room, liquid effluent
treatment facility, and decontamination facility) and without such restrictions (such as
personnel rooms (shower, toilets, etc.), administration buildings, visitors' centre, truck, railway
or boat terminal, shops, stores, and garages).
4) Detail Engineering Design
The main object of the detailed engineering design phase is to prepare for the construction
phase and the operational and closure phases. These phases confirm that the disposal facility
can be operated and closed safely and efficiently. Detailed design is completed to thesatisfaction of the relevant regulatory/licensing authorities.

52

Indonesia-General

Additional objectives are:a) to include any additional requirements from regulatory authorities introduced following
their review of and comments on the basic design;b) to further develop the basic design taking into account more detailed information on siteand environment and waste packages;c) to finalise details of the design for the overall disposal system and ancillary and auxiliary
facilities and produce associated drawings and other design documents;d) to finalise specifications for construction, equipment procurement and commissioning of
the facility;e) to finalise cost estimates for facility construction, operation and closure;f) to complete the development of facility specific waste acceptance criteria;g) to provide information to support the safety assessment undertaken for licencing
purposes;h) to define environmental surveillance and radiological monitoring programmes to be
conducted during operations and after closure of the disposal facility;i) to define operations personnel and staff training and support requirements;j) to provide to all concerned parties with the information requirements for final closure of
the facility;k) to finalise QA programmes for construction, operation, commissioning, and closure; andto prepare operational procedures, specifications and manuals.
5) Implementation
BATAN has a detail design of the near surface disposal at Serpong Nuclear Establishmentthat will be projected for storing the low level waste. But, the construction and operation of thenear surface disposal facility has been postponed by the Government. The near surface disposal
would be constructed if the budget available.

53

Indonesia-Specific-Part II. Specific Site Safety Assessment of LLW Repository1.

General Considerations for Safety Assessment

1) Regulatory requirement
The planning of construction and operation of near surface disposal (NSD) facility for low
level radioactive waste need a safety assessment. In order to provide assurance that radioactive
waste disposal system is functioning properly it is necessary to predict the individual dose as apart of safety assessment. In the Article 23 of BAPETEN Chairman Regulation No. 4/2013 is
mentioned that dose constraint value for public is 1 mSv/year.
2) Time Frame of assessment
Waste disposal must guarantee reasonable protection for both current and future generations,with a greater certainty balance for shorter periods and greater degrees of uncertainty as timegoes on. The timeframes normally considered in safety assessments include: a) from the closureof disposal facilities to the end of the institutional control period, b) from the end of theinstitutional control period to 10,000 years, and c) the period after 10,000 years. In the safetyassessment of Near Surface Disposal at Serpong Nuclear Area is determined that the time frame
between 0 to 1000 years.
3) Purpose of safety assessment
Basically, the purpose of safety assessment is to provide a reasonable scientific assurance that
disposal system will provide an adequate level of safety and meet the requirements to protect
human health and the environment.
Other purposes are :
a.

b.
d.

Site characterization and disposal facility design.
Supporting public trust.

e.

Supporting the confidence of decision makers.

c.

2.

Demonstrating compliance with regulatory requirements.
Knowledge and experience development.

Specific LLW Repository site (planning etc.)

1) Identifying Infrastructure The site of NSD for demonstration disposal is located in association with theRadioactive Waste Installation (RWI) and the Interim Storage (IS) located in the
Nuclear Serpong Area (NSA). So that the infrastructures are included to the in thatzone.
 The candidate of NSD facility is located in the NSA, PUSPIPTEK Area, Serpong,
Banten (Figure 1).
54Indonesia-SpecificFigure 1. Map of NSD location at Serpong Nuclear Area,
PUSPIPTEK, Serpong Banten

2) Capacity of repository
The NSD facility is vault type in 20.2 x 20.2 m size with a depth of 2.6 m from the groundsurface (4.43 m above the highest ground water level).
The facility was designed to accommodate waste packaged in 200 l drum and 950 l concrete
shell. The capacity of the disposal will be 1,350 drums and 144 concrete shells.
General layout of the proposed facility can be seen at Figure 2.
The assumption based on the calculation of total activity of Co-60 is 301,032 Bq and Cs-137
is 5,857,920 Bq.

Figure 2. Layout design of proposed NSD
3) Waste acceptance criteria
The NSD type has been chosen based on the suitability with the waste and site characteristic.
The purpose of construction and operation of NSD is to dispose the accumulated low level
radioactive waste that have been immobilized and packaged since 1988 at Radioactive Waste
55

Indonesia-SpecificInstallation (RWI) and stored at Interim Storage (IS) located in the Nuclear Serpong Area
(NSA).
The NSD facility in NSA is dedicated also for Demonstration Plant of Radioactive Waste
Disposal (DP-RWD) to demonstrate the safety and durability of the disposal system, so that,the public acceptance will also increase.
The radionuclides contained in the waste that was considered in the study were radionuclides
which dominantly contain in the packaged waste and as reference for the safety assessmentwith short half life less than or equal to about 30 years, namely Co-60 and Cs-137.
4) Areas away from major population centres
The site is not so far from the population centre, but the impact of the disposal had been
considered based on the result of safety assessment.
5) Close to existing or planned transport infrastructure
As mentioned above that the site of NSD for demonstration disposal is located in association
with the Radioactive Waste Installation (RWI) and the Interim Storage (IS) located in the
Nuclear Serpong Area (NSA). So that the transport infrastructure are included to the in thatzone.
6) Societal change in future
Societal change in future is considered relatively not so significant based on the limited landfor development.
3.

Guidelines for Safety Assessment

1) Base line data
Base line data concerning to climate, hydrogeology, biota etc., were obtained from
Environmental Impact Assessment Report, and also completed with routine monitoring from2011 to now.
2) Detailed site specific parameters
Detailed site specific parameters were obtained from engineering geology and hydrogeological investigation in 2010, and updated data until now.
Input data used in the software is the primary data obtained from field investigation onengineering geology and hydrogeology, climate data, secondary data and some assumption data
about site, conceptual design of the NSD facility and data of radioactive waste that will bedisposed off.
3) Description of the system ( near field, far field)
The disposal system generally consists of the following components:
56

Indonesia-Specific• Near field, including waste, disposal area, artificial barrier and disturbed zone around thedisposal area.
• The geosphere, including rocks and materials that exist between the near-field and thebiosphere, includes the unsaturated and water-saturated zones.
• Biosphere, part of the atmosphere, hydrosphere and soil where humans move.
The disposal system description should contain the following information:• Near field, including origin, condition, characteristics and quantity of waste, radionuclide
inventory, artificial barrier (waste packaging, disposal unit, disposal cover), and the
distribution and disturbed zone characteristics.
• Geosphere, including geological, hydrogeological, geochemical, tectonic and seismic
conditions.
• Biosphere, including climate and atmosphere, water bodies, human activities, biota,
lithostratigraphy near the surface, topography, geographic distribution and location.
The description developed must include qualitative and quantitative aspects of the systemcomponents. The description of the disposal system must be made in accordance with thepredetermined assessment context (which includes objectives, end-points, philosophy andtimeframe), and the level of detail must meet the context under consideration. And what is also
important to note and document is the existence of two sources of uncertainty, namely
uncertainties related to the characterization of the system; and uncertainties related to the future
evolution of the disposal system.
4) Develop and justify scenario
When conducting a safety assessment, the assessment of the performance of the disposal
system both present and future (including events that are expected to occur) is important. Thismeans that several different factors (such as conceptual models and parameter uncertainties,
long-term periods, changes in human behavior and climate) must be taken into account andevaluated. This can often be achieved through the development and analysis of a scenario.
A scenario can be defined as a member of a set of features, events and processes (FEP) that are
determined for predicting the future behavior of a disposal system in a safety assessment. The
scenarios chosen together will provide a comprehensive picture of the evolutionary system andcritical path that might occur based on the context of the study and description of the system.
There are several methods that can be used to develop scenarios, but none of them can beclaimed as the most correct. The relevant methods for near surface disposal are now being
reviewed in the ISAM program. These methods include expert judgment, fault tree analysis
and event tree analysis.

57

Indonesia-Specific

One common element in various approaches to developing scenarios is the preparation of a
FEP list that can directly or indirectly affect the radionuclide disposal and migration system.
The FEP is usually identified from the disposal system description. The FEP list should becompiled and documented in a systematic manner. The relative importance of each FEP isreviewed, generally using expert judgment. From the FEP review and judgment process will
be taken to the screening process, which in turn there will be a FEP that is wasted and there arethose that need further consideration in the safety analysis. FEP filtering can be assisted withcalculations.
Selected FEP lists are used together with system descriptions to develop scenarios. Then ascenario scenario will be used to analyze the assessment. The selected scenarios depend on the
purpose of the assessment (the context of the assessment). From these scenarios, the evolutionof future conditions, critical issues and system strength will be illustrated.
5) Formulate and implement Model
The process of formulating and implementing the model consists of the following stages:• Development of conceptual models from the disposal system;• Presentation of conceptual models and processes related to mathematical models;• Implementation of mathematical models in computer tools.
Conceptual Models
After the scenario is developed, the consequences for the assessment context must be analyzed.
For some scenarios it might be sufficient to use a qualitative assessment approach (ifquantitative data are not available). For scenarios that are studied quantitatively, they must beorganized in a form that allows them to be presented mathematically. A package of assumptions
for the model (dimensions, boundary conditions, FEP, interrelations between FEP and others)
is needed for each scenario, which is then used to form a conceptual model. More than one
conceptual model that may be consistent with information obtained for a scenario.
A conceptual model must at least contain a description of:• Basic FEP of the model;• Linkages between FEPs;• The scope of the application model in the dimensions of space and time.
The model should be sufficiently detailed so that the mathematical model can be developed to
explain the behavior of the system and its components which are sufficient to estimate theperformance of the system in the specified time frame.
Mathematical Model
Conceptual models for each scenario are then expressed in mathematical form as an algebraic
58

Indonesia-Specificand / or differential equation, with boundary and initial conditions which then need to find asolution. In practice, the mathematical representation of the disposal system will often be basedon an empirical understanding of the system's level of detail. An example is the uptake ofpollutants into biota, which are specifically represented by bioaccumulation factors. It is
important to recognize where a certain mathematical model, which might have been explainedin terms of a single empirical factor, in fact turns out to represent a different combination of
FEPs that might have been identified in the conceptual model. Therefore it is necessary to becareful to avoid double-counting the effects of certain processes, or vice versa, instead ignoring
potential relevant FEPs.
Computer Tools
Mathematical model solutions are usually implemented by one or more computer devices withanalytic or numerical methods. The device may already be available and or the device is
specifically developed for certain mathematical models. If there are only a few conceptualmodels and mathematical models, it is possible to use only one computer device.
Safety assessment of NSD facility in Serpong Nuclear Area uses Prediction of Radiation
Effects from Shallow Trench Operation – Environmental Protection Agency – Critical
Population Group/ General Population (PRESTO-EPA-CPG/POP) software version 4.2, issued
by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (US-EPA).
Mathematical models for calculating radiological dose:
Many equations are used as mathematical models for calculating the parameters of safety, but
due to space limitations will be presented only a simple formula to calculate the annual dose
received by population.
Dijl (k) = (KjEij(k).DFijl)/P(k)Kj
Eij(k)
DFijl
P(K)

:
:
:
:

Numerical factor introduced by units Eij(k),Exposure of radionuclide i in the exposure path j,dose rate factor of radionuclide i exposure pathways j and organ l,population on location k.

6) Run analysis
If scenarios and conceptual models and computer models have been developed andimplemented in software with structured data, then calculations can be carried out to assess theimpact of disposal facilities.
7) Interpret results
The results are then arranged, analyzed and presented. Interpretation of the results of the59Indonesia-Specificassessment will provide analysts with the first opportunity to test quantitative results fromscenario models.
Also important to look after and pay attention to is the presentation of results. Various methods
can be used to present results. Many alternative representations are possible to present theresults both for the output of deterministic models and probabilistic models. For example, thedosage curve over time showing a significant dose contribution from radionuclides has been
widely used. And it is vital to guarantee that the form of presentation used can satisfy theaudience.
The interpretation, analysis and presentation of results are followed by the decision making
process. It is multi-faceted and often many competing factors must be involved together andcombined to reach a decision.
8) Compare against assessment criteria
The results are compared with the criteria applied in the context of the assessment. The context
of the assessment will include regulatory criteria and possibly other indicators.
In analyzing the results of an assessment, it must not be forgotten that there are a number of
uncertainties associated with quantitative safety assessments.
4.

Confidence Building

1) Management of uncertainties ( Scenario, input data and model)
According to the IAEA, the uncertainty is considered to originate from three sources, namely:• Uncertainty due to the evolution of the disposal system in the time frame of theassessment (scenario uncertainty);• Uncertainty in data and parameters used as input in modeling.
• Uncertainty in the conceptual, mathematical and computer models used for simulating
the behavior and evolution of the disposal system (for example: the inability of the model
to be able to represent the system as a whole, estimates used in solving model equations,and coding errors);
2) Sensitivity analysis
The analytical skills in safety assessment need to be improved because this analysis is vital andas a capital for decision making.

60

Indonesia-Specific

Scenario analysis, pathways
Scenarios selected in this safety assessment is the scenario of the migration of radionuclides
through the groundwater pathway.
The main sources of water, which led to the leaching of radionuclides from contaminants matrix,
is precipitation.
Precipitation water at the site will infiltrates into the soil, flows over the surface of the ground,or evaporated into the atmosphere.
Transport of radionuclides from the site may occur due to water infiltration or runoff.
A dynamic model, which calculates evaporative water loss and water transport based on the
dynamic equations, is used to calculate the rate of infiltration.
The water that infiltrate into the zone of contamination will leach the radionuclide of the zone.
Contaminated water that flows as runoff or infiltrate into the site as a percolation flow,
eventually will enter the aquifer.
Radionuclides that eventually reach the aquifer generally will be transported at speed slower
than or equal to the speed of water flow in the aquifer.
Retardation as the interaction of radionuclides with the solid media in the aquifer, known as
the effect of sorption (uptake).
When radionuclides are transported in the aquifer of the wells water, it will be consumed byresidents in the site and/or off-site area through the drinking water, irrigation, and livestock
feed.
Radionuclide remaining in the aquifer is considered transported further and causing a general
population health impacts on downstream areas.
Water contaminated at the site would be accumulated if the infiltration rate exceeds the exfiltration rate out of the contaminated zone.
When the volume of water that accumulates in the waste exceeds the cavity /total porosity,
contaminated water will overflow to the land surface.
Radionuclides in the contaminated water would then be mixed with surface waterflow andsubsequent to the flow (river) nearby.
Potentially, contaminated water will be consumed byl ocal residents and residents who live
downstream through drinking water, irrigation, livestock feed and aquaculture.
61

Indonesia-SpecificConsequence analysis (example)
 The concentration of Co-60 in well water is 4.0x10-10Bq/m3in the year of 200 after closureand the concentration tend to decrease until 3.0x10-15Bq/m3 in the year of 300 after closureof the NSD.

 The concentration of Co-60 in well water is still far below the boundary value that has

been defined in regulation.
The maximum concentration of Co-60 in surface water is 1.52x10-3Bq/m3 in the first year
after closure and tend to decrease until 9.44x10-26Bq/m3 in the year of 401 after closure of
the NSD, so that, the concentration of radionuclide Co-60 in well water is far below theboundary value.
The maximum concentration of Cs-137 in surface water is 1.84 Bq/m3 in the 101 year after
closure and the concentration tend to decrease until 3.31x10-29Bq/m3 in the year of 2901
after closure of the NSD, so the concentration of Cs-137 in well water is still far below theboundary value.

 The total contribution of its largest individual dose is Cs-137 with a peak value at the
beginning of the year amounting to15.0x10-7μSv/year and the smallest value of 15.0x1013
μSv/year in the year 500 after post-closure of NSD.
 The total value of annual dose tend to decrease from year to year with a peak value of
5.0x10-9μSv/year in the early and the smallest dose is 5.0x10-38μSv/year in the year of 2600
post-closure, this value indicate that the total dose caused from post closure of the NSD isstill too far below the dose constraint value for public (1 mSv/year).
3) Public Involvement
Publics were involved primarily in the form as communication, socialization, consultation andcoordination when the environmental impact assessment report was developed. Besides that at
the initial stage of the site selection, site characterization, etc. some public involvement has
been started.
Processes and results of safety assessment should be peer reviewed by all stakeholder
components to assure the objectivity, systematically and integrity.
4) Documentation and preservation and availability of document
Presentation of results is usually already available in the safety assessment software, so all thatremains is to choose a good and convincing presentation technique.

62

JAPAN63

Japan-General

JAPAN-Part I. General Outline of LLW Repository1.

General Policy(1) Protection of Human Health and Environment
In processing and disposing of radioactive waste, it is essential to recognize that thedisposal of the radioactive waste should not be left to future generations; it is the
responsibility of the current generation who have enjoyed the benefits of nuclear energyuse.
It is known that some nuclear industry and R&D institutions are running short ofwaste storage capacity. To ensure the smooth implementation of full-scaledecommissioning in the years ahead, it will be necessary to secure suitable waste disposalsites and to expand their capacity by means of clearance process. A pressing challenge here
is securing of the understanding of the general public and local residents that is aprerequisite for these steps.
To suitably address this challenge, the nuclear industry that has generated theradioactive waste needs to take more prominent and active role in accordance with the“polluter pays principle.” If nuclear industry has apprehensions, they should actively
engage in exchange of views with the regulatory agency. At the same time, the National
Government needs to strengthen its overall progress management.
If it is considered more effective and efficient to process and dispose of the waste
centrally in accordance with the properties of the waste, without arguing the generator or
source of the waste, it is desirable for the National Government or nuclear industry to
examine the necessary measures to be taken. (Japan Atomic Energy Commission, Basic
Policy for Nuclear Energy, pp15-16, 20 July 2017)(2) Environmental Impact Assessment
Article 2 of the Atomic Energy Basic Act, which is a higher level law of both the Act
on the Regulation of Nuclear Source Material, Nuclear Fuel Material and Reactors, andAct on Prevention of Radiation Hazards due to Radioisotopes, etc., describes
environmental impact assessment as follows:

Article 2 The research, development and utilization of nuclear energy shallbe limited to peaceful purposes, shall aim at ensuring safety, and shall be
performed independently under democratic administration, and the results

64Japan-Generalobtained shall be made public so as to actively contribute to international
cooperation.


2 Safety assurance described in the preceding paragraph shall be performed
based on the established international criteria, aiming at contributing toprotection of people’s lives, health and properties, and preservation ofenvironment, as well as security of our country.

(3) Principles and Safety Assessment
1) General Considerations for Safety Assessment
Radioactive wastes are generated from the use of radiation and nuclear energy in suchas nuclear power plants, nuclear fuel cycle facilities, universities, laboratories, and medical
institutions, related research and development, and decommissioning of these facilities. It
is important to process and dispose these radioactive wastes as a vital aspect of the use ofradiation and nuclear energy so as not to significantly affect the human health and theliving environment.
There are varieties of radioactive wastes in terms of physical and chemical forms,
types of radioactive materials, and the radioactive concentration. Thus, the radioactive
wastes should be appropriately processed according to the characteristics, classified
according to the radioactive concentration (see Fig. 1), and then reasonably disposed of(see Fig. 2).
In Basic Policy for Nuclear Energy decided by the Cabinet of Japan in April 2014,
the following policies were set for the processing and disposal of radioactive wastes; (i)enforcement of measures for achieving solutions and promotions concerning themanagement of high-level radioactive wastes under the responsibility of the current
generation, and (ii) promotion of disposal of low-level radioactive wastes generated from
activities such as the decommissioning. In line with these policies, objectives for theprocessing and disposal for the radioactive wastes have been discussed in Japan according
to the classification of the radioactive wastes, and the framework for safety regulations has
been improved. Furthermore, there have been activities on the mutual understanding
among national and local people as well as the research and development for necessary
technologies.

65

Japan-GeneralFig. 1. Image of radioactive waste classification in Japan (source: White Paper on Nuclear
Energy, 2016. Atomic Energy Commission of Japan. Summary report available at:
http://www.aec.go.jp/jicst/NC/about/hakusho/hakusho2016/gaiyo_1_e.pdf）

66Japan-General70

Fig. 2. Image of radioactive waste disposal method in Japan (source: White Paper on
Nuclear Energy, 2016. Atomic Energy Commission of Japan. Summary report available at:
http://www.aec.go.jp/jicst/NC/about/hakusho/hakusho2016/gaiyo_1_e.pdf）

67Japan-General2) Radiation and Environmental Protection Principles
A) Safety Assessment of Public Exposure(Reference: Interpretation of Regulations of Criteria for Site, Structure andEquipment of Category 2 Waste Disposal Facility)
Public dose, due to direct and skyshine radiation from radioactive waste
disposal facilities under normal conditions, including those due to leakage andtransfer of radioactive materials from the facilities, and due to release of radioactive
materials to environment from the facilities, shall not exceed the dose limit ordinatedby regulations, and shall not exceed 50μSv/y of effective dose considering with theprinciple of As Low As Reasonable Achievable (ALARA).
Radiation dose to people staying outside of the control area, where people comein and out, shall not exceed the public dose limit.
Public dose in case of an accident or emergency shall be 5mSv or less, and shalltake into consideration followings:
i.
ii.
iii.

Scattering of radioactive materials due to falling of radioactive solid wastecaused by operational errors, etc.
Influence of fire and explosion in the relevant waste disposal facility
The other abnormal leakage of radioactive materials from the perspective of
public exposure due to breakdown of equipment, equipment failure,
operational errors, etc.

Demonstrate the prospect of transition to a state required no activities on theconservation of the waste disposal facility by closure.
For this purpose, concerning the basic design and its policy of waste disposal
facility, influence of radioactive materials on environment induced by radioactive
wastes buried after the commencement of decommissioning shall be designed basedon the knowledge at the time of designing the facility to meet the standards shown
belowa) Natural Process Scenario: Scenario with natural process in consideration withradioactive material leakage, transport through natural barriers, to rivers, etc.,
and general land use (except for activities with excavation of waste disposalsite) , shall be assessed as follows;68

Japan-General・Public exposure shall not excess 300 μSv/y in the scenario with theseverest combination of the conditions of artificial / natural barrier andthe pathways to public, within scientifically reasonable range.
・Public exposure shall not excess 10 μSv/y in assessment under the most
likely parameters that make up the combination of artificial / naturalbarrier conditions and pathways to public within scientificallyreasonable range.
・Public exposure shall be assessed in consideration with superposition
effect, if multiple disposal facilities have planned of installation at thesame site.
b) Human Intrusion Scenario: Public exposure caused on radioactive material
leakage, transport through natural barriers, to rivers, etc., and general land
use with excavation of waste disposal facility, shall not excess 300 μSv/y due
to trench disposal, and shall not excess 1 mSv/y due to pit disposal or trenchdisposal with the equipment of resistance against excavation (equivalent tosurrounding partition) .
These scenarios shall be assessed in consideration with natural phenomena andhuman activities of land use that affect artificial barriers and natural barriers*, basedon past records, the latest scientific and technical knowledge of the site of the waste
disposal facility and its surroundings, such as on-site surveys.
The period to be evaluated after the commencement of decommissioning is theperiod until the maximum value of the value evaluated as the dose received by the
public for each scenario appears.
B) Radioactivity Concentration Criteria for Radioactive Wastei.

Trench Disposal (Reference: Regulations of Category 2 Waste Disposal Projectof Nuclear Fuel Material or Material Contaminated by Nuclear Fuel Material,
Appendix 2)• Co-60 10 GBq/t• Sr-90 10 MBq/t• Cs-137 100 MBq/tii.

Pit Disposal (Reference: Regulations of Category 2 Waste Disposal Project of
Nuclear Fuel Material or Material Contaminated by Nuclear Fuel Material,
Appendix 1)• C-14 100 GBq/t• Co-60 1 PBq/t
69

Japan-General

•
•
•
•
•

Ni-63 10 TBq/t
Sr-90 10 GBq/t
Tc-99 1 GBq/t
Cs-137 100 TBq/t
α emitters 10 GBq/tiii.

Intermediate depth disposal (Reference: Enforcement Order for the Act on theRegulation of Nuclear Source Material, Nuclear Fuel Material and Reactors,
Article 31)• C-14 10 PBq/t• Cl-36 10 TBq/t• Tc-99 100 TBq/t• I-129 1 TBq/t• α emitters 100 GBq/tiv.

Geological disposal• No provision of upper limit of radioactive nuclide and radioactivity
concentration(4) Regulatory and Operational System Preparation
1) Regulatory Regime for Licensing the Low Level Radioactive Waste Repositories as
Disposal Project







Defined by the Act on the Regulation of Nuclear Source Material, Nuclear Fuel
Material and Reactors, Article 51-2 to 51-34.
Defined by the Enforcement Order for the Act on the Regulation of Nuclear
Source Material, Nuclear Fuel Material and Reactors, Article 30 to Article 37.
Defined by the Regulations of Category 2 Waste Disposal Project of Nuclear Fuel
Material or Material Contaminated by Nuclear Fuel Material.
Defined by the Regulations of Criteria for Site, Structure and Equipment of
Category 2 Waste Disposal Facility
Defined by the Announcement that prescribes technical details of Measures for
Category 2 Waste Disposal of Nuclear Fuel Material.
Interpretation of Regulations of Criteria for Site, Structure and Equipment of
Category 2 Waste Disposal Facility was Decided by Nuclear Regulation
Authority

2) Organizations


Operator:

70

Japan-GeneralJapan Nuclear Fuel Limited (concerning wastes of Electric Power Companies
and commercial use)
Japan Atomic Energy Agency (concerning wastes of Research Institute andHospital)Promoter (Government): Japan Atomic Energy Commission
 Agency for Natural Resources and Energy
 Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology

Regulator (Government):
 Nuclear Regulation Authority※1

3) Verification of Wastes
Refer to the verification items provided in “Regulations Concerning the
Activities of Category 2 Radioactive Waste Disposal Nuclear Source Material,
Nuclear Fuel Material and their Contaminated Material, Article 8, Paragraph 2.
Followings are the technical standards specified by this regulation.
A) Packaged waste (waste form for intermediate depth disposal and pit disposal)i.

Packaged waste of liquids or ion exchange resins, incineration ashes, filter
sludge, particulate matter or molded powder shall be solidified in containers.

ii.
iii.
iv.
v.
vi.

vii.

Packaged waste of solids shall be sealed or solidified in containers.
Packaged waste shall not excess the maximum radioactive concentration
listed on the documents for application,
Packaged waste shall avoid the risk of damage on integrity of package by its
containing materials until settlement on disposal facility.
Packaged waste shall keep robustness to withstand its risk of overload until
termination of disposal.
Packaged waste shall keep minimize the scattering or leakage of radioactive
material due to falling from the assumed maximum height until settlement on
disposal facility.
Packaged waste shall be labelled the marks of radioactive waste on thesurface of the waste package with clear and hard to erased, supported
notification to verification the items listed in the application.

※1

Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare regulates wastes from hospital, Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry
and Fisheries regulates wastes from veterinary service

71

Japan-Generalviii.

Packaged waste shall be attached with the document of the specifications
below:


Assurance for the compliance with the technical standards above
Elaborations of the package of the waste sealed or solidified
Strength of the package and its measurement method
Radioactive materials the waste contains, and the measurement methodB) Concrete-like waste (waste form for pit disposal and trench disposal)
i.
ii.
iii.
iv.

Concrete-like waste shall not excess the maximum radioactive concentration
listed on the documents for application,
Concrete-like waste shall avoid the risk of damage on integrity of the disposal
facility by its containing materials.
Concrete-like waste shall be supported notification to verification the items
listed in the application.
Concrete-like waste shall be attached with the document of the specifications
below:


Assurance for the compliance with the technical standards above
Radioactive materials the waste contains, and the measurement method(5) Site Selection (An Example from the Plan of JAEA Disposal Facility)(Reference: Plan for Implementation of Disposal (Radioactive Waste of ResearchInstitutes etc.), November 2019 Approval on Change)
1) Characteristics of Acceptable SiteA) Conformity Assessment Items
i.

Assessment Index of Safety
Take into consideration and assess the natural environment, namely“Volcano”, ”Tsunami”, “Depression”, “Landslide”, “Cataract”, “Fault (Active
Fault)” (ground with no displacement hazard), and confirm that the candidate
site has no safety problems with these items.

ii.

Assessment Index of Environmental Preservation
Take into consideration and assess the “Restriction and Plan for Land Use”
and “Preservation of Cultural Assets” which are based on the legal provisions
such as Natural Conservation Law and the Law for the Protection of Cultural

72

Japan-General

Properties, and confirm that the usage of candidate site is not limited andextremely difficult in terms of environmental preservation of the candidate site.
iii.

OthersConfirm that the candidate site can secure adequate area for disposal.
Details are separately prescribed and provided by JAEA.

B) Comparative Assessment Items
Take into consideration and assess the ease of securing a certain scale ofdisposal site, and the convenience of transportation of waste in terms of economic
efficiency and convenience, and confirm that the disposal can be smoothly
conducted. Details are separately prescribed and provided by JAEA based on thesocioeconomic circumstances.
2) Design and Construction of Disposal Facilities
A) Technical Standards of the Approval of the Design and Construction Method
Followings are the technical items prescribed based on the Regulations of
Criteria for Site, Structure and Equipment of Category 2 Waste Disposal Facility,
and on the Interpretation of Regulations of Criteria for Site, Structure andEquipment of Category 2 Waste Disposal Facility.












Ground of the waste disposal facility
Prevention of damage by earthquake
Prevention of damage by tsunami
Prevention of damage by external shock (possible natural phenomena andunintended human intrusion)
Prevention of damage by fire etc. (fire detection, fire extinction, impact
reduction measures)
Shielding etc. (dose rate reduction around the place of activity, prevention
measures for the scattering of radioactive materials)
Prevention of radiation hazards in case of emergency (public protection aroundthe site during the period from start of waste acceptance to decommissioning,and prospects that disposal site would transition into a maintenance-free state
during the period of above mentioned)
Waste disposal site (having abnormal leakage prevention function, having
enclosure function until the end of disposal in case of pit disposal, not losing
safety due to chemical materials contained in the wastes)
Radiation control facility (establishment of dose monitoring and control
facility for workers and the site boundary etc.)73

Japan-General






Waste facility (installation of facilities with capability of reduction processingof radioactivity concentration in air and water at the supervised area boundary)
Monitoring facility of ground water level etc.
Power reserve
Telecommunication facilities etc.

B) Development of Operational Safety Programs
Followings are the items to be confirmed concerning the examination
standards of safety program listed in the “Provisions of Category 2 Waste Disposal
Project of Nuclear Fuel Material or Material Contaminated by Nuclear Fuel
Material” and “Enactment of Examination Standards of Safety Program in Disposal
Facilities Related to the Category 2 Waste Disposal Project”




















System for compliance with related laws and safety programs
System for promoting safety culture
Quality assurance of waste disposal facility
Duties and organization of persons in management of waste disposal facilities
Scope of duties of the chief engineer of radioactive waste etc.
Operational safety education
Measures taken for the operational safety of Category 2 waste disposal inaccordance with the attenuation of radioactivity
Setting of control area, supervised area and disposal maintenance area etc.
Emissions monitoring facility and wastewater monitoring facility
Dose, dose equivalent rate, decontamination etc.
Monitoring of waste disposal site and its surrounding circumstances
Patrol and inspection of waste disposal facilities
Transport and disposal of radioactive waste etc.
Measures to be taken in case of emergency
Record and report
Periodic assessment of waste disposal facility etc.
Technical information sharing
Information disclosure in case of nonconformance
Other necessary items

C) Closure criteria
Closure shall be conducted within 300-400 years after disposal in case of pit
disposal, and within about 50 years in case of trench disposal.

74

Japan-General

The item that “prospects shall be obtained that disposal site would transition
into a maintenance-free state” within above mentioned period indicates that the
expected influence of radioactive materials on environment induced by theradioactive wastes buried after the commencement of decommissioning shall be
designed based on the knowledge at the time of designing the waste disposal
facility to meet the standards concerning basic design and its policy of waste
disposal facility (cf. 1. (3) 2) A) Safety Assessment of Public Exposure).
i.

ii.

Natural Process Scenario: Scenario with natural process shall be assessed asfollows;• Not excess 300μSv/y in the scenario with the severest combination of
the conditions of artificial / natural barrier and the pathways to public,
within scientifically reasonable range.
• Not excess 10μSv/y in assessment under the most likely parameters
Human Intrusion Scenario: Public exposure caused on land use withexcavation of waste disposal facility• Not excess 300μSv/y due to trench disposal, and shall not excess 1 mSv/ydue to pit disposal or trench disposal with the equipment of resistanceagainst excavation (equivalent to surrounding partition) .

D) Control after Closure• In the case of pit disposal and trench disposal, it shall be indicated that“prospects shall be obtained that disposal site would transition into amaintenance-free state”.
• Intermediate depth disposal is under consideration of Nuclear Regulation
Authority as of January 2019.
3) Recording and Quality Assurance (Reference: Enactment of Examination
Standards of Safety Program in Disposal Facilities Related to the Category 2
Waste Disposal Project)Examination standards on application for development of safety program
concerning the disposal facilities related to the activities of Category 2 waste disposal
is open for public, and description on quality assurance is as follows as of January
2019.


Quality assurance plan shall be established based on JEAC 4011-2009 or anequivalent standard that are approved in the Provisions of Category 2 Waste
Disposal Project of Nuclear Fuel Material or Material Contaminated by Nuclear
Fuel Material, Article 20, paragraph 1, item 3, “Quality Assurance of Waste
75

Japan-GeneralDisposal Facility”, Provisions of Nuclear Fuel Material Processing Project,
Article 7-2-2 to Article 7-8, Provisions of Spent Nuclear Fuel Reprocessing
Project, Article 8-3 to Article 8-9
Description on quality assurance shall be based on the “About description ofquality assurance mentioned in safety programs of waste disposal facility related
to the Category 2 waste disposal project” (12 February 2009, NISA No. 6 (2March 2009, NISA192a-09-1)
With regards to the positioning of operation procedures in safety programs, tocomply with the manuals, operational procedures and other safety related
documents prescribed in the Provisions of Category 2 Waste Disposal Project of
Nuclear Fuel Material or Material Contaminated by Nuclear Fuel Material,
Article 13, paragraph 10, positioning of those documents shall be clearly definedaccording to their importance in the hierarchical system of quality assurance
documents such as safety programs and its secondary document and tertiary
document.

76

Japan-Specific-Part II. Specific Site Safety Assessment of LLW Repository1.

General Considerations for Safety Assessment (Reference: Regulations of Criteria
for Site, Structure and Equipment of Category 2 Waste Disposal Facility)(1) Policy, Public Acceptance, etc.
Operate final disposal in an appropriate way according to the type of the nuclear fuelmaterial or material contaminated by nuclear fuel material based on the Act on theRegulation of Nuclear Source Material, Nuclear Fuel Material and Reactors.
Specifically, after the intermediate depth disposal of radioactive solid wastes from
nuclear facilities, control radiation exposure giving consideration to the possible public
exposure level, and make a proper disposal until it is recognized that the disposal site nolonger requires management in terms of exposure control due to reductions in radioactivity.
Radioactive wastes are classified into trench disposal, pit disposal, etc. according totheir radioactivity level by types of radioactive materials.
Prospects shall be obtained that disposal site would transition into a maintenance-freestate by the end of disposal facility management period (which is about 300-400 years after
disposal for pit disposal, and 50 years for trench disposal). (Regulations of Criteria for Site,
Structure and Equipment of Category 2 Waste Disposal Facility, Article 9, paragraph 1,
item 2)
1) Safety Assessment: Dose Standards (cf. 1. (3) 2) A) Safety Assessment of
Public Exposure)i.

Natural Process Scenario: Scenario with natural process shall be assessed asfollows;• Not excess 300μSv/y in the scenario with the severest combination of
the conditions of artificial / natural barrier and the pathways to public,
within scientifically reasonable range.
• Not excess 10μSv/y in assessment under the most likely parametersii.

Human Intrusion Scenario: Public exposure caused on land use withexcavation of waste disposal facility• Not excess 300μSv/y due to trench disposal, and shall not excess 1
mSv/y due to pit disposal or trench disposal with the equipment ofresistance against excavation (equivalent to surrounding partition)2) Safety Assessment: Other Technical Standards
Disposal Facility Design: Basic Functions and Design Requirements andManagement Requirements Related to Waste Disposal Site
77

Japan-SpecificA) Shielding Function (Pit-disposal, Trench Disposal, in Operation)<Purpose> Not to exceed the dose limit (50μSv/y) to the public on supervisedarea.
Not to exceed the emergency dose limit (5mSv/y) to the public in emergency
case as follows:i. Scattering of radioactive materials due to falling of radioactive solid wastecaused by operational errors, etc.
ii. Influence of fire and explosion in the relevant waste disposal facility
iii. The other abnormal leakage of radioactive materials from the perspectiveof public exposure due to breakdown of equipment, equipment failure,
operational errors, etc.
<Design Requirements> Design to monitor dose equivalent rate in supervisedarea.
<Management Requirements> Monitor dose equivalent rate related to direct
and skyshine radiation in supervised area.
B) Confinement Function (Pit Disposal)<Purpose> No leakage from the limited area of the disposal facility<Design Requirements> Installation of surrounding partition or equivalentequipment. Designed to monitor leakage from the limited area of the disposal
facility.
<Management Requirements> Measure radioactive materials leaked fromengineered barriers.
C) Controlling Radionuclide Migration Function (pit disposal and trenchdisposal)<Purpose> Function of controlling radionuclide migration works properly<Design Requirements> Designed to monitor the leakage of radioactive
materials<Management Requirements> Measure ground water level, leakage of doseand activity concentration.
3) Others (Management Requirements)A) Limited access to the supervised area.
B) Inspection, and prohibition and constraints of certain activities in disposalconservation district.
C) Other safety measures: design requirements against natural phenomena.

78

Japan-Specific<Design Requirements> Not to affect safety against fire, explosion,
earthquake, tsunami, external shock (possible natural phenomena (excluding
earthquake and tsunami) etc.), etc.
(2) Specific LLW Repository Site (1) JAEA Demonstration Test of Trench Disposal
1) Specification of the Repository.
A) Name: Waste Disposal Facility (Demonstration Test of Waste Disposal),
Nuclear Science Research Institute, Japan Atomic Energy Agency (JAEA)
B) Location: Tokai-mura, Naka-gun, Ibaraki, JapanC) Type of Waste and Project Activities: Disposal of wastes such as contaminatedconcrete produced with dismantling of JPDR (Japan Power Demonstration
Reactor), which is not solidified in container.
D) Maximum Disposal Capacity: 2,520 cubic meters approx...
2) History of JAEA Demonstration Test of Trench Disposal
A) Data Acquisition Program (Reference: “Decommissioning Techniques”,
issues 15, May 1996)


October 1993: Disposal license application
June 1995: Application approved
October 1995: Operational safety programs approvedi. Radioactivity of each disposed radioactive materials shall not exceed
the value specified in the license application. (Specify radioactivity
level and weight by disposal unit, and calculate cumulative
radioactivity after all wastes are disposed.
ii. Removal of pooled water in the disposal district and prevention of rainwater intrusion during disposal activities. (Installation of protective
tent)iii. Prevention measures for the scattering of radioactive materials(enclosure in flexible containers, packing in plastic sheets)
iv. Measures not to leave airgaps after disposal (filling up of the gaps
between wastes with dirt, and implementation of intermediate cover)v. Prohibition of disposal of hazardous or explosive materials.
(implementation of work management for dirt and cover)vi. Implementation of cover to prevent permeability from becoming higher
than that of surrounding soils. (implementation of soil compaction,
implementation of hydraulic test)

79

Japan-SpecificB) Pre-operational, Operational and Post-Closure Monitoring

Disposal Phase (period of stationary work on waste, and period till theconfirmation of upper cover stabilization: 1.5 to 2 years approx...)i. Setting control area
ii. Setting supervised areaiii. Environmental monitoring
iv. Ambient dose equivalent measurementv. Ground water observations
vi. Regular observation of radioactivity level in ground water and ambientsoilvii. Release control area after completion of soil cover constructions, andset disposal conservation district and start observation of stability ofupper cover.
viii. Inspection and maintenance of waste disposal siteConservation Phase (for 28 years after the disposal phase is concluded)i. Continuation of disposal conservation district (release of supervisedarea)
ii. Observation of radioactivity level in ground water and soil as necessaryiii. Inspection and maintenance of waste disposal site
iv. Restriction or prohibition of certain activities including drilling andresidence within disposal conservation district.

C) Scenario analysis, pathways
Thermoluminescence
dosimeter

Vegetation

Monitoring hole
Cover soil

2.5m

T.P. +8.0m
low permeability soil
7m

3.5m
45m
VLLW concrete packaged in polyester container

80

water level

Japan-SpecificConcrete waste packaged in polyester container

Outlook of trench disposal
penetration inhibitor coverfacility

andAssessment during the period of disposal phase and conservation phasei. External exposure (skyshine radiation) from the wastes to be disposedof (unsolidified concrete etc.).
ii. Internal exposure through intake of marine products contaminated by
the radioactive materials which were leaked from wastes to be disposedof and discharged into the ocean via ground water.
Critical pathway is ”i. External exposure” 1.2 x 10-2µSv/y

Assessment after the conservation phase is concluded (simulate unlimited
release for site reuse)[General Events]
i. Internal exposure through intake of marine products contaminated by
the radioactive materials which were leaked from wastes to be disposedof and discharged into the ocean via ground water.
ii. External and internal exposure of the construction workers who are
engaged in drilling the old nuclear installation site partially, by direct
radiation and through dust inhalation respectively.
iii. External and internal exposure of residents living in the house built on
the excavated soil of the partially drilled old nuclear installation site,by direct radiation and through dust inhalation respectively.
Critical pathway is ”iii. External exposure of residents” 6.2 x 10-1µSv/y[Infrequent Events]
i. External and internal exposure of the construction workers who are
engaged in drilling the whole old nuclear installation site, by direct
radiation and through dust inhalation respectively.
ii. External and internal exposure of residents living in the house built on
the excavated soil of the fully drilled old nuclear installation site, bydirect radiation and through dust inhalation respectively.
81

Japan-Specificiii. Internal exposure through drinking ground water from the well placed
just near the disposal site.
Critical pathway is ”iii. Internal exposure through drinking ground water”
6.2 µSv/y(3) Specific LLW Repository Site (2) Rokkasho Low-level Radioactive Waste
Disposal Center
1) Specification of the Repository.
A) History of Rokkasho Low-level Radioactive Waste Disposal Center
As of the end of March 2016, the total amounts of low-level radioactive wastes
generated and stored in the domestic nuclear power plants are approximately
680,000 of 200-liter waste drums. A part of these low-level radioactive wastes has
been transported to and disposed of at the Low-level Radioactive Waste Disposal
Center operated by Japan Nuclear Fuel Limited (JNFL) in Rokkasho village of
Aomori Prefecture (see Fig. 3) of which land area is approximately 3,400,000 m3).
Currently, the Low-level Radioactive Waste Disposal Center has two facilities
in operation at the same disposal site. One is designed to dispose of drums containing
homogeneous and solidified wastes such as condensed liquid wastes, used resin andfly ash, that were packed by cement, asphalt, and plastic. The acceptance of such
low-level radioactive wastes in this first facility (i.e., No. 1 Disposal Facility) has
started since December 1992. The other (i.e., No. 2 Disposal Facility) is designed todispose of drums containing other solid wastes such as metals, plastics, thermal
insulation materials, and filters, that were packed by cement-based fillers (i.e.,mortar), and the acceptance has started since October 2000. The capacity of eachdisposal facility is 40,000 m3, which is equivalent to 200,000 of 200-liter drums. Asof the end of March 2018, the total amounts of drums that have been disposed of are
148,147 at the No.1 Disposal Facility and 148,872 at the No.2 Disposal Facility,
respectively.
Given the situation that the No. 2 Disposal Facility will be fully occupied by
the waste drums expected to be transported from each nuclear power plant in Japanin coming years, the JNFL has submitted an application to the Nuclear Regulation
Authority of Japan in August 2018 to ask a new construction of a disposal facility(i.e., No. 3 Disposal Facility) at the same site and also to make use of the existing
disposal facilities.

82

Japan-SpecificFig. 3. Concept for pit disposal at Rokkasho Low-level Radioactive Waste Disposal Center(Source: Japan Nuclear Fuel Limited. Available at https://www.jnfl.co.jp/en/business/llw/).

83

Japan-SpecificB) Guidelines for Safety Assessment
Safety requirements for the radioactive waste disposal facility are given in laws
such as “Act on the Regulation of Nuclear Source Material, Nuclear Fuel Material
and Reactors”. The basic objective is to ensure the safety by confining radioactive
materials using passive facilities and equipment, by securing the safety function
regarding the migration suppression and radiation shielding, and by appropriately
combining these functions. In addition, by securing an appropriate safety margin, it
is designed to prevent the occurrence of an abnormal situation, and even if theabnormal situation arises, it is designed not to significantly impact the public aroundthe installation in terms of the exposure dose to ionizing radiation.
The dose limit of 1 mSv per year is defined for the public outside of theperipheral monitoring area by “Rule of Disposal for Second Kind Waste of Nuclear
Source Material or Material Contaminated by Nuclear Source Material”, and it isrequired to design the waste disposal facility so that the dose to the public becomes
far below this dose limit even in the case of loss of safety function. For the period
from the acceptance of radioactive wastes for the disposal at the facility to thebeginning of the decommissioning of the facility, it is required to design the facility,
in addition to the compliance with the aforementioned public dose limit defined by
the related notice, so that the public dose during the normal operation from theexposure to radiation leaked from the facility, the migration of radionuclides, direct
exposure to gamma ray emitted from the facility, gamma ray from the sky shine, andthe discharges of radioactive materials into the environment, is controlled as low asreasonably achieved and becomes lower than 0.05 mSv per year. Furthermore, it isrequired to ensure that the public dose becomes lower than 1 mSv per an accident orincident even in the case of accidental and abnormal situations.
As for the land to be used for the waste disposal, it is designed to ensure that aperspective can be obtained that it can proceed to a condition in whichcountermeasures regarding the preservation of waste disposal are not necessary after
the decommissioning phase starts. Here, the condition in which countermeasures
regarding the preservation are not necessary means that the disposal facility isdesigned to ensure that there are enough possibilities that the pubic dose becomes
lower than 0.01 mSv (10 µSv) per year in the basic scenario, and does not exceed
0.3 mSv (300 µSv) per year in the less-likely scenario and 1 mSv per year in natural
event and artificial event except the basic and less-likely scenarios. The basic
scenario is to be assessed using parameters that are considered to be scientificallymost probable under scientifically most probable conditions in consideration ofseries of changes that are considered to be most probable based on characteristics ofthe disposal facility, geological environment in surrounding areas, and exposure84

Japan-Specificpathways. The less-likely scenario is to be assessed by most conservative settings
that are considered to be scientifically reasonable under the settings of conditions incomprehensive consideration of uncertainties of the basic scenario.
C) Activities for Building Trust for Safety
An example of confidence building in Japan includes an activity to develop
private standards to be endorsed by the regulatory body. In this respect, the Standards
Committee has been established in the Atomic Energy Society of Japan (AESJ) in
order to ensure the safety and reliability of nuclear facilities, and to maintain anddevelop the technological level in Japan. Four Technical Committee have been
established under the Standards Committee for each topic, namely, System Safety,
Risk Assessment, Nuclear Fuel Cycle, and Advanced and Fundamental Systems.
The AESJ Standards are the agreed documents regarding technologies to beachieved in activities such as the design of nuclear facility, construction, operation,and decommissioning, based on the latest experience and knowledge of providers of
nuclear technologies, users, and experts. The Standards are developed through theprocess of discussions in compliance with the justice, fairness, and openness, hearing
opinions of stakeholders that may be affected through the public consultation.
With respect to methodologies to be applied for a safety assessment of the lowlevel radioactive wastes, the following Standards have been developed under theTechnical Committee on Nuclear Fuel Cycle depending on the types of disposal
facility (see Fig. 2).


Trench disposal of L3 waste (2006): methodology for safety assessment ofradioactive waste disposal of the extremely low-level radioactivity (AESJ-SCF007)
Pit disposal of L2 waste (2012): methodology for safety assessment of pit
disposal in the near surface (AESJ-SC-F023).
Intermediate depth disposal of L1 waste (2008): methodology for safetyassessment of depth disposal (AESJ-SC-F012)

Note that the Standards are to be revised in every five years in principle andwidely open to opinions, on the basis of the understanding that the value of its use
can be maintained by appropriately revising the Standards reflecting thedevelopment of new technologies and the latest experience and knowledge.

85

Japan-SpecificProcessing of soil and other wastes containing radionuclides released due to the accident
at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant.
1.

Basic policy for radioactive contamination in Fukushima Prefecture
Soil and other wastes were widely contaminated with the radioactive materials released
into the environment due to the accident at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plantfollowing the Great East Japan Earthquake in March 2011. “The Act on Special Measuresconcerning the Handling of Radioactive Pollution” was promulgated on 30 August 2011, toreduce the effects of the contaminated materials to the human health and the living environment.
On 11 November of the same year, the basic policy providing the following particulars wasindicated.
A) Monitoring and measurement for grasping the situation of the environment contaminatedby the radioactive materials released due to the accident:
Monitoring and measurement should be periodically conducted in cooperation
among the national and local governments and the Nuclear Operators, to grasp thesituation of the contaminated environment as well as the effectiveness of theimplemented waste processing and decontamination. The results and/or information
obtained should be publicly available.
B)

Processing of the wastes contaminated by the radioactive materials released due to theaccident:
Wastes interfering with the peripheral residents’ life, e.g. removal soil bydecontamination and disaster wastes generated near the living environment, should begiven priority to be processed. Separation between flammable and non-flammablewastes, volume reduction by intermediate processing and recycling should be
implemented while securing safety. An additional dose of the peripheral residents due towaste processing should not be exceeded 1 mSv/y and the living environment should beconserved. Before the eventual close of the collected waste management, the additionaldose should be ensured not to be exceeded 10 µSv/y2 based on the assumption of thescientifically reasonable exposure scenario.

C)

Measures for decontamination of soil and other wastes:
Because of the wide coverage of decontamination (soil, road, river, lake, coast,
harbor, agricultural land, forest, etc.), an operational plan should be preferentiallydeveloped for key areas in terms of human health protection, e.g. the living environment
for children who have high radiosensitivity, to implement the necessary measures

2

According to ICRP Publ. 104, the order of magnitude of 10-100 µSv/y is considered to be small incomparison with the variation in natural background radiation and could be regarded as the trivial level ofindividual effective dose.

86

Japan-Specificaccording to the dose level. The aims of decontamination are: to reduce the area where the effective dose exceeds 20 mSv/y (as an additional dose
except for exposure due to natural radiation and medical exposure) in a phased andan expeditious manner; and to achieve 1 mSv/y in the long term3 for the area where the effective dose is lessthan 20 mSv/y.
D) Collection, transportation, storage and disposal of removal soil:
Measures to prevent from scattering and escaping, to implement monitoring and tokeep records (information on how much and where the removal soil was transported)should be carried out whenever collection, transportation, storage or disposal of theremoval soil was conducted. The volume of the soil should be reduced as much as
possible during the process of storage and disposal, and the low-level contaminated soil
should be recycled while ensuring safety.
Removal soil, sludge and vegetation containing radionuclides generated bydecontamination were stored in temporary storage sites established by each municipality
in Fukushima Prefecture for about three years, then transported to an intermediatestorage facility and will be stored intensively for 30 years at the maximum. Radioactive
wastes which were not able to be recycled within 30 years will be also transported to a
final disposal site established outside of the Fukushima Prefecture in the future although
the scale and place of the final disposal site are still under consideration.
2.

Temporary disposal site established in the Fukushima Prefecture(1) Safety measures at temporary disposal site
Temporary disposal sites were established at a place far away from the residential
area enough to secure safety with the following measures.
A) Scattering prevention of removal soil:
Removal soil should be put into flexible container bags or sandbags.
B) Intrusion prevention of rainwater and spill prevention of radioactive materials:
Temporary disposal sites should be covered entirely by a waterproof sheet even
including the bottom face to avoid contamination of the land itself under the sites.
C) Radiation shielding:
Sandbags should be arranged around removal soil for shielding. 98% of

3

According to ICRP Publ. 111, the lower part of the 1-20 mSv/y band was recommended to be selected as
the reference level for the optimization of protection for the people living in contaminated areas, and 1 mSv/y
was given as a typical value used for constraining the optimization process in long-term post-accident
situations.

87

Japan-Specificradiation could be shielded by a sandbag layer with the thickness of 30cm.
(2)

Attitude of the residents for establishment of temporary disposal sites
Local residents were critical of establishment of temporary disposal sites, both fromthe concern about increase of radiation level by gathering radioactive wastes in one placeand from their perspective as victims of the nuclear accident. In Date City, Fukushima
Prefecture, as results of the repeated dialogues between city officials and local residents,
the first temporary disposal site was established in October 2011. Continuous efforts toencourage the residents to confirm the limited radiation level around the actual
temporary disposal sites enabled to proceed further establishments of temporary disposalsites. Date City has held as many as 83 times of dialogues until December 2011 under
the technical supports of radiation protection experts. These dialogues led to building
the trust relationship with the local residents and strengthening information sharing
among the residents. The passive attitude of the residents who wished to steer the
temporary disposal sites away from the living environment to the mountains was
gradually changed to the active attitude rather to manage it closely and to implement thenecessary measures in terms of radiation protection especially for children.

(3)

Transportation status from the temporal disposal sites to the intermediatestorage facility
1,300 temporal disposal sites have been established in Fukushima Prefecture. At
least at 350 sites, removal soil has been completely transported to the intermediatestorage facility by 2018; 250 sites out of them have been restored. By the end of 2019,
further removal soil at about 450 sites will have been transported and more than 250
sites out of them are estimated to be restored. Removal soil at all the sites is expected tobe finally transported to the intermediate storage facility by March 2021.

3.

Intermediate storage facility established around Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power
plant(1) Safety design of the intermediate storage facility
The intermediate storage facility straddling Okuma and Futaba Town wasestablished around the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant and put into full-scale
operation in October 2017. The waste volume needs to be transported to the intermediatestorage facility is estimated to be 14,000,000 m3 and about 2,000,000 m3 of the wastes
has been already transported by January 2019. More than 90% of the wastes are removal
soil generated by decontamination and 80% of the soil contains less than 8,000 Bq/kg ofradiocaesium. The intermediate storage facility has soil storage facilities (Type I andType II) and waste storage facilities, and the following safety measures were taken foreach facility.
88Japan-SpecificA) Soil storage facility (Type I): A facility that stores removal soil containing 8,000
Bq/kg or less of radiocaesium and being unlikely to contaminate groundwater.
 To transport gradually while preventing from scattering and spill ofradiocaesium by soil/sheet covering.
 To prevent from scattering, spill and external exposure by soil covering after
transportation.
 To store the soil in a facility with water shielding function, if it is likely tocontaminate groundwater due to inclusion of a certain level of organic
substances.
B) Soil storage facility (Type II): A facility that stores removal soil containing morethan 8,000 Bq/kg of radiocaesium.
 To implement the same measures as Type I.
 To remove radioactive materials contained in leachate at a water treatment
facility before its releasing into the river.
C) Waste storage facility: A facility that stores wastes containing more than 100,000
Bq/kg of radiocaesium.
 To seal off the wastes into a container and prevent from scattering and spill.
 To store the containers in the building which has the shielding effect to preventfrom external exposure.
 To establish the facility on hilly area or upland with hard soil which could
withstand the maximum scale of an earthquake and a tsunami estimated basedon the Great East Japan Earthquake occurred in March 2011.
The results of environmental monitoring around the intermediate storage facility,
i.e. air dose rate and radiocaesium concentration of groundwater, are publicly available
via its website.
(2)

Efforts for final disposal outside of Fukushima Prefecture
It was agreed that final disposal of the radioactive wastes stored in the intermediatestorage facility will be completed outside of Fukushima Prefecture within 30 years. The
needs of further efforts are recognized on:

development of volume reduction and recycling techniques;promotion of recycling;
consideration of final disposal scenarios; andfostering of nationwide understanding.

The criteria for recycling of the radioactive wastes is currently estimated 8,0004,000 Bq/kg, corresponding to the annual dose of 1 mSv or less according to the intended
89

Japan-Specificuse. Although most of radioactive wastes could be recycled scientifically becauseradiocaesium concentration will be decreased to about 40% after a storage period of 30
years in the intermediate storage facility, it is essential to foster the nationwide
understanding and trust for realization.

90

KAZAKHSTAN

91

Kazakhstan-General

KAZAKHSTAN-Part I. General Outline of LLW Repository1.

General Policy

The objective of the national policy of the Republic of Kazakhstan for radioactive waste
management is to create and provide for effective functioning of comprehensive radioactive
waste management system that allows to achieve safe management (including disposal) withradioactive wastes of all types and categories which were accumulated in previous years, areavailable at present and will be generated in the future, with the rational use of financial,technical, and human resources, taking into account international experience.
The basic principles of the national policy for radioactive waste management are thefollowing:- Radioactive wastes produced at the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan should be
disposed in such a way to ensure radiation protection of public and environment for the whole
period of potential hazard of the wastes;- Individuals and legal entities engaged in nuclear energy use activities leading to thegeneration of radioactive wastes are obliged to take measures for waste minimization;- Safe storage/disposal of radioactive wastes should be provided for by design andoperational documentation as a mandatory step of any type of activity leading to the generationof radioactive wastes;- Radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel management activity is carried out based on
license;- Radioactive waste management has to fulfil requirements of nuclear and radiation safety
and security in accordance with legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan in the field of nuclear
energy use as well as international treaties ratified by the Republic of Kazakhstan.
1.1. Legal Framework: Acts & Regulations
The following legal acts regulate the relations in the field of radioactive wastes
management in the Republic of Kazakhstan:- Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan as of February 3, 2010 No. 246-IV on “Ratificationof the “Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety ofRadioactive Wastes Management”;- Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan as of February 10, 2011, No. 405-IV on “Ratificationof the “Vienna Convention on Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage”;- Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan on February 3, 2010 No. 245-IV on “Ratification of
the “Convention on Nuclear Safety”;- Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan as of January 9, 2007 No. 212-III “Environmental
Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan”;
92Kazakhstan-General- Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan as of January 12, 2016 No.442-V “On Use of Nuclear
Energy”;- Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan as of April 23, 1998 No.219-I “On Radiation Safetyof Population”;- Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan as of December 27, 2017 No.125-VI “On Subsoil
and Subsoil Use”;- Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan as of May 16, 2014 No.202-V “On Permissions andNotifications”;- Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan as of April 11, 2014 No.188-V “On Civil Protection”.
Also these relations are regulated by a number of regulative legal acts:- The Order of Minister of Energy of the Republic of Kazakhstan as of February 20, 2017
No.58 on “Approval of Technical Regulation “Nuclear and Radiation Safety”;- The Order of Minister of Energy of the Republic of Kazakhstan as of February 20, 2017
No.59 on “Approval of Technical Regulation “Nuclear and Radiation Safety of Research
Nuclear Facilities”;- The Order of Minister of Energy of the Republic of Kazakhstan as of February 20, 2017
No.60 on “Approval of Technical Regulation “Nuclear and Radiation Safety of Nuclear Power
Plants”;- The Order of the Minister of Energy of the Republic of Kazakhstan as of February 8,
2016 No.39 on “Approval of Rules for Collection, Storage and Disposal of Radioactive Wastes
and Spent Nuclear Fuel”;- The Resolution of Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan as of May 24, 2016 No.
301 on “Approval of Rules for Siting of Nuclear Facilities and Disposal Facilities ”;- The Order of Minister of Energy of the Republic of Kazakhstan as of February 22, 2016
No.75 on “Approval of Rules for Transportation of Radioactive Substances and Radioactive
Wastes”;- The Order of Minister of Energy of the Republic of Kazakhstan as of February 22, 2016,
No.76 on “Approval of Rules for Transportation of Nuclear Materials”;- The Order of Minister of Energy of the Republic of Kazakhstan as of February 9, 2016,
No.49 on “Approval of Rules for Radionuclide Sources Management”;- The Order of Acting Minister of Energy of the Republic of Kazakhstan as of February
12, 2016, No.59 on “Approval of Rules for State Accounting of Ionizing Radiation Sources”;- The Order of Minister of Energy of the Republic of Kazakhstan as of February 9, 2016
No.44 on “Approval of Rules for State Accounting of Nuclear Materials”;- The Order of Minister of Energy of the Republic of Kazakhstan as of February 9, 2016,
No.51 on “Approval of Rules on Approval of Designs of Transport Packaging”;- The Resolution of Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan as of May 12, 2016, No.
287 on “Approval of Rules for Decommissioning of Nuclear and Radiation Facilities”;
93Kazakhstan-General- The Order of Acting Minister on Investments and Development of the Republic of
Kazakhstan as of December 26, 2014, No. 297 on “Approval of Rules for Ensuring Industrial
Safety in Geological Exploration, Mining and Processing of Uranium”;- The Order of Acting Minister on Investments and Development of the Republic of
Kazakhstan as of December 26, 2014, No.301 on “Approval of Rules for Ensuring Industrial
Safety in Ionizing Radiation Sources Management”;- The Order of Minister of Healthcare System of the Republic of Kazakhstan as of June
26, 2019, No. KR DSM-97 on “Approval of Sanitary Rules “Sanitary-Epidemiological
Requirements to Ensure Radiation Safety”;- The Order of Acting Minister of the National Economy of the Republic of Kazakhstan
as March 27, 2015, No. 260 “Sanitary Rules “Sanitary and Epidemiological Requirements for
Radiation Hazardous Facilities”;- The Order of Minister of the National Economy of the Republic of Kazakhstan as ofFebruary 27, 2015, No. 155 “Hygienic Standards “Sanitary and Epidemiological Requirements
to Ensure Radiation Safety”;- The Order of Chairman of CAE MEMR RK No.66 as of July 17, 2008. “Safety
Guidelines on Near Surface Disposal of Radioactive Wastes”.
1.2. Safety Objective
The main objective of radiation safety is to protect health of population, including
personnel from harmful effects of ionizing radiation by observing the basic principles andstandards of radiation safety without unreasonable restrictions of useful activity using radiationin various fields of economy, science and medicine.
1.3. Disposal Strategy
The most elaborated conception in regulatory documents and repeatedly implemented in
Kazakhstan concerning final isolation of low and medium-level wastes is their near surface
long-term storage (and disposal in the future) – i.e. disposition of such wastes in engineering
structures at the surface of the land and/or at a depth of several tens meters.
The objective of disposition and isolation of RW in this way is to eliminate unacceptablerisks to human health and long-term hazard for the environment both during the operation ofstorage facility (in case of disposal – repository facility) and after its closure.
To achieve this objective, the complex of near surface long-term storage of wastes should
ensure:- Reliable isolation of wastes from the environment;- Penetration protection;- Control of potential release of radionuclides into the environment;- Limitation of any beyond-design discharges to the environment;- Continuing supervision of site during the established monitoring period after the closure
94

Kazakhstan-Generalof complex.
1.4. National RWM Strategy/Plan
At the present moment, Kazakhstan does not have any developed and adopted at the
government level National Strategy (or Plan) for radioactive wastes management. However,preliminary work on creation of such type document is underway – several years ago a conceptof the strategy was developed. At this concept, the implementation of strategy in several stages
is under consideration.
During the first stage lasting 10-15 years, it would be reasonable to carry out the following
measures:- To compile a complete inventory of RW available in the country, especially: to carry out
full inventory of all RW storage sites; to assess the hazard of all available storage sites,
including those storage sites formed during the USSR period, to classify them in accordancewith the hazard level, the time reserves to prevent radionuclides distribution and to take adecision on further management with them (for example, concentrated redisposal andlocalization at the one disposal site or local RW isolation); to conduct zoning of the territory
according to the hazard level and determine priorities; to establish centralized and continuous
accounting of RW, based on annual inventory;- To adopt the Law on Radioactive Wastes in which it is necessary to clearly define thestate policy on RW management and approve the national program on nuclear wastes, toregulate state regulation and responsibility / functional duties of the participants in theimplementation of the radioactive waste management strategy;- To improve Legal Acts, Standards and Rules in the field of Radioactive wastes
management;- To establish a National Organization on the radioactive waste management, including
their long-term storage and disposal;- To create effective financial mechanism for radioactive waste management;- To ensure safe operation of the existing RW storages;- To start removal and conditioning of operational radioactive wastes from storages of
BN-350, NNC RK, Ulba Metallurgical Plant, ICMP;- To construct facilities for processing, conditioning and packaging of radioactive wastes
according to preliminary criteria of radioactive wastes acceptance for storage and disposal;- To create park of transport vehicles for radioactive wastes transportation;- To start operations on projection, construction, and commissioning of disposal sites forvery low-active wastes, short-lived low and medium active wastes as well as centralized
storage for interim storage of high-active and long-lived low and medium active wastes;- To adopt a decision on the feasibility of disposal site construction in deep geologicalformations when the development program for Kazakhstan’s nuclear energy is approved,
involving new NPP construction in the country; and, if the decision is positive, to start work
95

Kazakhstan-Generalon site selection for the construction of a facility for the disposal of highly active and longlived low- and medium-active wastes in stable deep geological formations.
At the second stage (lasting 35-40 years) the following can be supposedly realized:- Conduction of territories rehabilitation contaminated with wastes from uranium mining
and oil and gas industry;- Development of technologies, equipment and work performance on rehabilitation of
territories contaminated in the result of nuclear explosions in Kazakhstan;- Completion of operations on elimination of hazardous storages of radioactive wastes
including those which were formed during USSR period before the introduction of RW
regulation in Kazakhstan;- Completion of works on removal and conditioning of operational radioactive wastes
from the storages of BN-350, NNC RK, Ulba Metallurgical Plant, ICMP and their transfer for
disposal;- Disposal of all accumulated very low-active RW, long-lived and medium-active wastes;- Implementation of safe interim storage of high-active and long-lived low and medium
active wastes;- In case of decision making on the feasibility of constructing a disposal site in deep
geological formations, the design, construction and commissioning of storage for disposal ofhigh-active and long-lived low and medium-active wastes in stable deep geological formations
should be carried out.
It is supposed at the third stage (lasting 10-15 years):- to carry out operation of conditioning facility and packaging of all types and categories
wastes;- to carry out operation of disposal facilities for radioactive wastes of all types andcategories available in the country;- to implement measures on rehabilitation of radioactively contaminated territories.
2.

Principles and Safety Assessment

2.1. Fundamental safety principles
The basic principles of ensuring long-term safety of near surface storage/disposal facilities
of RW are:- the principle of applying several levels of protection, including: form and stability of thewaste itself; reliability of their packaging; natural barriers of the storage / disposal site;
engineering barriers (structures) of the storage/repository; storage / repository operation
method and control methods;- the principle of non-exceeding radiation dose quotas established by radiation safety
standards for the population from storage/disposal of RW;
96

Kazakhstan-General- the principle of minimizing operational costs for long-term monitoring and control ofthe safety of storage/disposal.
2.2. Safety Criteria (Dose limit/ Dose constraint for Occupational Worker and Public)
The basic document regulating the requirements of the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan“On Radiation Safety for Population” is “Sanitary-Epidemiological Requirements to Ensure
Radiation Safety”.
This document establishes three classes of standards for all categories of exposed persons(personnel of group “A”, personnel of group “B” and population):- Main dose limits- Permissible levels of monofactor exposure (for a single radionuclide, for a one route ofentry, or for one type of external exposure) that are derived from the main dose limits: annual
intake limit, allowable average annual volumetric activity, average annual specific activity,
equivalent dose rate;- Control levels (doses, levels, activities, flux densities). Their values take into accountthe level of radiation safety achieved in the organization and provide conditions under which
the radiation exposure will be below the permissible level.
The main limits of radiation doses do not include doses from natural and medical exposure,
as well as doses due to radiation accidents. There are special restrictions on these types of
exposure.
The effective dose for personnel should not exceed over the period of occupational activity(50 years) – 1000 mSv, for public over the period of live (70 years) – 70 mSv.
The annual effective exposure dose for personnel due to normal operation fromtechnogenic sources of ionizing radiation should not exceed the values of doses limits presented
in Table 1.
The annual effective dose refers to the sum of effective external exposure dose received
in a calendar year and the expected effective internal exposure dose due to the intake ofradionuclides to the body for the same year.
Permissible levels of ionizing radiation exposure and other requirements to limit human
exposure are determined from dose limits taken equal to 20 mSv per year for personnel and1 mSv per year for the population.
Table 1 – Basic Dose Limits

Normative values
Effective Dose

Dose Limits
Personnel of Group А
Population
20 mSv per year in average 1 mSv per year in average for any
for any subsequent 5 years, subsequent 5 years, but not more
but not more than 50 mSv than 5 mSv per year
per year

Equivalent dose per yearin:97

Kazakhstan-General

lens
skin
hands and feet

20 mSv
500 mSv
500 mSv

15 mSv
50 mSv
50 mSv

Note:- Simultaneous irradiation to the specified limits is allowed for all normative values;- Main dose limits, like all other permissible exposure levels for B group personnel are
1/4 of the values for A group personnel.
2.3. Common formulation of safety assessment
Construction of any RW management facilities (including facilities for long-term storage
and/or disposal) is preceded by development and approval of design documentation, including
safety analysis report (SAR), as one of the compulsory elements on safety analysis, presenting
justification of safety at normal operation and at normal operation failure, including accidents
occurrence. SAR includes systematic, complete and non-contradictory safety justification,
exercised by doing deterministic and (in some cases) probabilistic safety analysis.
On the basis of conducted analysis, design basis is created for systems, affecting the safety,
and the compliance with established safety criteria is confirmed.
2.4. Long term safety of RW repository
Safety analysis is a procedure for assessing functional indicators of long-term
storage/disposal facility and, in particular, its potential radiological consequences for humanhealth and environment.
Special attention during analysis is paid to assessing the different methods andmechanisms that may lead to human exposure during facility operation and its closure.
Safety analysis includes quantitative assessment of radiation consequences for worst-casescenarios that could occur during operation and after closure of long-term storage/disposal
facility, as well as impact assessment in case of unintended penetration after completion of
specified monitoring and control period.
Since facility and its closure may represent a potential threat for human health, aprediction of expected impact is made during safety analysis preparation and safety measures
are developed with the purpose to protect the future generation. Considering the most probableways of long-term storage/disposal facility evolution after its closure, the design
documentation provides for that predicted dose value for population would not exceed 0.1 ofdose limit norms established for radiation safety, and collective annual dose for critical groupof population would not exceed 1 man-sieverts (man-Zv).
Considering the issues on long-term protection of environment, any non-radiation impacts
beside radiation factors are considered as well, such as chemical contamination or native
habitat change.

98

Kazakhstan-General

2.5. Monitoring and Institutional Control
The design documentation shall provide for sanitary protection zone around thestorage/disposal facility and creation of environment monitoring system for the period of
operation and during the specified monitoring period. Measures and means of monitoring shallnot imperil the long-term functional specifications of the whole storage/disposal facility. Sizeof sanitary-protection zone is set in accordance with the existing sanitary rules.
Radiation monitoring procedure, dosimetry control execution procedure in area ofincreased radiation hazard, description of individual protection gears and alarm, list and policyon the maintenance and retention of accounting records, personnel training program and otherorganizational and technical measures are reflected in Radiation Protection Plan (orinstructions). The plan is a subject for periodic revision and re-approval within the time limit
and in manner prescribed by authorized agency.
After storage/disposal facility closure, population access to the site or its alternate use isforbidden during the specified monitoring and control period.
The duration of specified monitoring and control period is substantiated on design stageof storage/disposal facility, considering composition and nature of waste, its specific and total
activity, as well as predicted activity within disposal facility in the future and existing
experience on information storage. In accordance with RK rules the monitoring period
established shall not exceed 100 years.
Organization is assigned for the specified monitoring and control period that would be
responsible for application of active and/or passive surveillance measures over environment
state.
2.6. Safety assessment during entire life cycle of the repository
Storage/disposal facility construction can be started only at availability of approved andagreed-on facility design documentation reviewed by State supervision and monitoring bodies
in legal manner.
At pre-construction phase the operating organization shall submit the preliminary safety
analysis report for storage/disposal facility to authorized agency. A positive conclusion on
results of preliminary SAR review is considered as the official permit for construction gained
from authorized agency.
At the post-construction phase the operating organization shall submit to authorized
agency a final SAR, that includes all amendments inserted into design during the construction
and commissioning storage/disposal facility. Positive conclusion on results of final SAR review
is a compulsory condition for operating license issue on storage/disposal facility operation.
Internal commission shall be appointed regularly (no less once a year) by the managementof storage/disposal facility for radiation safety inspection at the facility.
When commissioning, periodically (no less once per 3 years), as well as whenreconstructing (modernization) that would affect design basis of storage/disposal facility, the99Kazakhstan-Generalauthorized agency shall execute independent inspection on control over compliance withtechnical regulations requirements and safety rules.
3.

Regulatory and Operational System Preparation

3.1. Existence of Regulatory Frame for Radioactive Waste Repository
Basic documents in RK, referring to storage/disposal facilities, are as follows:- Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated January 12, 2016 # 442-V “On Use of Nuclear
Energy”;- Decree of the Ministry of Energy of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated February 8, 2016
# 39 “On Approving the Rules for Collection, Storage and Disposal of Radioactive Wastes andSpent Nuclear Fuel”;- Decree of the Chairman of KAE MEMR RK # 66 dated July 17, 2008 on “Radioactive
Waste Near Surface Disposal Safety Manual”.
3.2. Responsibility to Develop, Construct and Operate of Waste Repository
Construction, operation and decommissioning of long-term storage/disposal facilities ispermitted to be exercised only by legal persons. Such legal persons are under obligation to havea license for the appropriate type of activity in the field of nuclear power.
Operating organization is responsible facility operational safety assurance and: executes
safety and environmental impact assessment; provides necessary level of personnel, populationand environmental safety; establishes required organizational structure; executes personnel
recruitment and training; purchases necessary quantity of qualitative equipment; develops andimplements quality assurance program on RW management; executes surveillance andmonitoring of technological process.
Long-term storage/disposal facility decommissioning is carried out basing on facility’management decision, agreed with an authorized agency and in accordance with the final
Facility Decommissioning Plan.
Decision on disposal facility closure is taken by the Government of the Republic of
Kazakhstan upon proposal submitted by the authorized agency after corresponding activities
completion. The proposal is based on the disposal facility closure activities, performed byoperating organization, involving:- remediation of the territory, contaminated due to disposal facility operation;- measurements of radiation environment at disposal facility;- preparation of documentation for archiving accompanied with complete description ofradioactive wastes disposed, disposition facility structure, geotectonic, geological andgeophysical characteristics of disposal facility positioning.
Operating organization is responsible for disposal facility safety up to all work completionon its closure, provided by the design documentation, including territory remediation.

100

Kazakhstan-General

3.3. Knowledge management system (Inventory, Waste characterization, Data
management [site selection]
The operating organization is primarily responsible for creation of an informationcollection and storage system of RW receipt, storing and disposal.
The operating organization develops a system of collection and keeping:- the whole design documentation of the storage/disposal facility,- accounting records of wastes inventories, accepted or existed in RW storage/disposal
facility,- data on operation, radiation monitoring results, dosimetry control, incidents occurred,- information on the impacts on personnel, population and environment.
The operating organization designates a person, responsible for RW accounting andstoring, who regulates RW receipt upon established sanitary rules. This person makes
schematic map on RW placement within storage facility. All RW received are registered in theaccounting log book. The current accounting log book is kept on constant basis. Copies of RW
technical passports (certificates) are kept by the person, responsible for RW accounting andstoring. Organization management provides preservation of the accompanying documents
during the whole operating period. Table 2 presents example of radioactive wastes accounting
form.

Type and # of storage tank,package, container

рН medium

Quantity of radioactive wastes (kgor l)Radionuclide composition andtypes of radiation

Specific activity

Total activity

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Description and # of transportation
container

Radioactive waste types (solid,
liquid radioactive wastes)

2

Full name and signature ofreceiving side

Receipt Date

1

12

13

Full name and signature ofdelivering sidea#

RW Description

Table 2 – Radioactive Wastes Accounting Log Book

11

Annually, during storage/repository filling, the Commission, designated by organization
management, carries out RW inventory (checks the correctness of RW accounting procedure)delivered for long-term storage/disposal. Inventory commission involves people responsible
for accounting, storing, as well as management and accounting department representatives.
101

Kazakhstan-General

Inventory commission checks:- presence of accompanying documents for RW (passports, certificates);- conformance of RW radiation source characterizing records in accounting log books withdata specified in accompanying documents (passports, certificates);- RW physical verification at storage facilities and compliance of obtained data withrecords in accounting log books and accountancy data;- correctness of accountancy and accuracy of records in accounting log books when RW
receiving and transferring;- conformance of schematic map with RW actual placement in storage/repository. In caseof non-conformity the schematic maps shall be amended.
Upon inventory results of radiation sources, the commission prepares Inventory Act thatis a subject for signing by all members of inventory commission and approval by organization
manager and stamping.
All documentation shall be kept in operating organization, and transferred to the state(regional) archive after facility closure and kept up to the expiration of specified monitoring
and control period.
After the expiry of specified monitoring and control period any proposals on alternativeuse of the territory shall be a subject of ecological expertise and assessment under applicablelaw. The corresponding warning signs and reminders on the previous use of the territory shallbe reflected in the land use documents and kept for 300 years.
4.

Site Selection

4.1. Area/site screening
Decision on construction and location of long-term storage/disposal facilities is made by
the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan upon agreement with the local representative
bodies within the territory of which it is planning to construct these facilities, considering:- needs in them to solve economic targets of the country and separate regions;- availability of certain conditions for location of the facilities, meeting the requirementsof the RK legislation in the sphere of nuclear power use;
- zero threat for the facilities’ safety from nearly located civil and military objects;- requirements, established by ecological legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan;- possible social and economic consequences from the objects location affecting theindustrial, agricultural and social development of the region.
Practice of such a decision making in RK involves:- issue of Governmental decree on Working Group establishment, that would be
responsible for site selection;- criteria development for regions and site selection;- preliminary selection of regions and possible construction sites within these regions;102

Kazakhstan-General- visiting regions and possible construction sites by Working Group;- preparation of the analysis report upon characteristics, advantages and disadvantages ofsite location regions and possible construction sites;- issue of an act on selection of region and possible construction sites.
After decision making on construction and region, operations are conducted on specificsite selection out of alternative ones (not less than three).
Site is selected considering:- possible external impact of natural and (or) technogenic character;- possible transfer of radioactive substances;- possibility to prevent population and environmental impact due to storage/disposal
facility operation or due to incidents or accidents occurrence.
Works on storage and (or) disposal facility construction include special studies andeconomic assessments making considering environmental impact, involving radiation dose
exposure for population critical groups.
4.2. Site Criteria
When selecting a land for construction, the following conditions shall be met (briefly):- availability of ground water unsuitable for drinking and technical water supply becauseof salinity;- high sorption and capacity properties of enclosing rocks;- significant ground water depth (sixty meters and more);- ground water level at least four meters from bottom of radioactive waste storage/disposal
facility;- geologic horizons which are not aquifers and have no hydraulic connection with
underlying aquifers;- absence of fault tectonics and intensive fissuring, distance to quake-prone fault line overforty kilometers;- very low sensitivity to faulting, subsidence, depression;- absence of erosion;- geomorphologic stability;- solid and very dense soils and rocks of foundation of facility;- impermeable rocks of foundation, thickness over ten meters;- gentle terrain with slope under five percent;- distance to the closest ground and underground water intake or surface water source atleast four kilometers;- actual land use is not economically effective, potential land use is also not admittedly
evaluated;- cultural and national assets are absent within four kilometers;- location hold no value for tourists and rarely visited by residents of nearest settlements.
103

Kazakhstan-General

4.3. Exclusion Criteria
Location of radioactive wastes disposal facility is prohibited at:- residential construction areas;- at area where there are deposits of useful minerals without approval of exploration
authority;- active karst areas;- areas of landslides, debris flows and snow slides and other dangerous geologic processes;- swamps;- drinking water underground source zones;- resorts protective sanitary zones;- urban green belt zones;- specially protected natural areas;- areas of I, II, III belt of sanitary protection zone for ground and underground sources ofutility and drinking water supply, sewage facilities, water mains;- water shed areas;- land under or designated for forests, forest-parks and other green space, which protect
and fulfil sanitary-hygienic functions and are public resting places.
4.4. Societal and political acceptability (local acceptance, national approval)
Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan takes a decision on construction and area
where storage/disposal is to be constructed, after agreement with local representative bodies of
the region where the storage/disposal facility is designed to be constructed.
Ecological and sanitary-epidemiological expertise is obligatory for design documentation
for RW storage/disposal facilities.
Radiation-hazardous facilities’ construction projects require public hearings.
5.

Design and Construction of Disposal Facilities

5.1. Estimated cost and Funding
Organization operating a storage/disposal facility shall have necessary managerial,
financial, material and technical resources, as well as qualified personnel to provide safe
operation and service of a facility for the whole life-cycle period. This organization provides
for funds for design work, project expertise, construction, commissioning and operation ofradioactive wastes storage/disposal facility, disposal facility closure, post-utilization,
elimination of radiation accidents’ consequences, compensation for damage caused to the lifeand health of people, property of private and legal bodies, and to the environment.
As an example, table 3 presents preliminary information on cost for construction of lowactive RW long-term storage/disposal facility 100 000 m3 with prices as of mid-year 2019.

104

Kazakhstan-General
Table 3 – Implementation period and cost#

Description of Work

Period
Total

Cost
1.

Development of Feasibility
Study

2.

Development ofDocumentation

3.

ConstructionofRW
storage/disposal facility

Total, thous. tenge

Design

2021

2022

2023

2024

29 134

4 320

–

–

33 454––21 449.87–

21 449.87–––

597 654597 654

29 1344 320

21 449.87 597 654 652 557.87

5.2. Requirements
Technical decisions in design of storage/disposal facility shall be state-of-the-art.
Integrity of containers with RW should be preserved during the whole period ofstorage/disposal. Space between the containers shall be filled with bulk non-radioactive
materials or bounding solutions (cement) to prevent their falling down or precipitation.
The foundation of storage/disposal facility must be capable of carrying the whole facility.
Design shall provide for reliable engineering barriers of natural and/or man-madematerials. Engineering barriers shall safely isolate waste, prevent erosion process, prevent or
limit contact with water and radionuclide migration in all foreseeable situations including
unintentional penetration after closure.
Design life of engineering barriers against unintentional penetration shall be at least 500
years.
Minimal thickness of engineering barriers at storage/disposal facility depends upon
conditions of dose for population which shall be below determined limits for specified
monitoring and control period.
Design shall present limits and conditions for normal operation of facility.
Also, design shall provide for system to detect, collect and remove water from any
structure of disposal facility to prevent water erosion of barrier. Water discharge outside facility
area without radiation monitoring and decontamination is not allowed.
Design shall provide for alarm and fire-fighting systems, smoke exhaust system and firebarriers taking into account a category of radiation hazard of facility.
Design shall provide for separate storage/disposal of low and medium-active wastes.
Separate storage is recommended for waste batches which significantly differ in time of activity
reduction to clearance levels.
Design shall provide for sanitary protection zone around storage/disposal facility andenvironment monitoring system for the period of operation and specified monitoring period.
105

Kazakhstan-General

Monitoring instruments and methods shall not endanger long-term functional characteristics offacility. Size of sanitary protection zone is determined in accordance with applicable sanitary
Rules.
Design shall include estimate of staff numbers for radiation safety and monitoring.
Design substantiates and determines limit of total activity at storage/disposal facility. At
that SAR shall present quantitative evaluation of potential exposure to population, caused byradionuclide migration, and predict stochastic effects.
Any changes or design deviation which effect storage/disposal facility safety shall beagreed.
5.3. Conceptual design
Construction of RW storage/disposal facility requires pre-design and design
documentations be developed.
Pre-design documentation is documents, prepared prior to development of a construction
design, including program, reports, feasibility study, technical and economic estimations,
results of scientific research and engineering investigation, technological and structure analysis,
sketches, mock-ups, site measurements and survey results, and other initial data and material
necessary for decision making for design documents elaboration and further design
implementation.
Pre-design documents subject to approval include feasibility studies and other investment
calculation and justification documents specified by legislation.
Feasibility study for RW storage/disposal facilities includes the following sections:- initial data;- introduction;- marketing section;- RW storage/disposal facility performance;- provision of resources;- design and engineering solutions;- facility location;- architectural and construction concept;- transport;- engineering systems;- environmental impact assessment;- institutional section;- financial analysis;- investment economic efficiency;- social section;- economic performance;- general conclusions;106

Kazakhstan-General- attachments.
5.4. Basic engineering design
There are two stages of development – design and work.
Design documentation for RW storage/disposal facility at design stage includes thefollowing sections:- facility passport;- general explanatory note;- facility plan and transport arrangement;- engineering protection of the area;- technical solutions;- management of facility, arrangement of conditions and safety engineering for employees;- architectural and construction concept;- engineering networks, systems and equipment;- report (or special section) on safety analysis;- civil defense engineering measures and natural and technogenic emergency prevention
measures;- public protection plan for radiation accident situation;- buildings and facilities automatic monitoring system;- system for integrated safety and security, anti-terrorism security;- arrangement of construction work scope of which is determined by design task;- environmental protection;- estimate documentation;- investment efficiency (in accordance with conditions of design task) and economic
performance;- summary of basic construction materials, products and equipment;- preliminary plan for RW storage/disposal facility decommissioning.
Work documentation for RW storage/disposal site is developed at second design stage incompliance with requirements of state standards, technological design administrative
regulations.
Work documentation includes:- drawing design for construction and assembling operations;- drawing design for building products and structures;- sketch drawing for overall view of non-typical products;- estimate documentation;- bill of quantities of construction and assembling operations, summary list of materials
and equipment specifications, products and materials.

107

Kazakhstan-General

5.5. Implementation
To ensure system and equipment functioning at long-term storage/disposal facility inaccordance with approved design before regular operations, operating organization shalldevelop and implement Commissioning Program.
Commissioning of long-term storage/disposal facility is allowed following the completionof construction and assembling operations at underground and ground facilities, which are thepart of start-up basics, determined by design.
After construction is completed, State Commission, appointed in accordance with existinglegislation, establish facility compliance with taken design solutions and requirements ofeffective standards and rules. Approved Act of the State Commission is the basis to start-up
facility operation.
Operation license, issued as applicable by nuclear power use authority, permits to start
accepting wastes.
5.6. Quality assurance (Standard & Certification)
Quality assurance program (QAP), which is a set of administrative and technical measures
to assure quality, regulates quality management during life cycle of storage/disposal facility.
QAP elements consider foreseeable impact of operation, structures, systems andcomponents to the safety of disposal facility. Results of safety analysis determine safety-related
operations, structures, systems and components.
QAP include as follows:- general quality assurance program for total life cycle;- quality assurance program for location selection;- quality assurance program for design;- quality assurance program for equipment manufacturing;- quality assurance program for manufacturing;- quality assurance program for construction;- quality assurance program for commissioning;- quality assurance program for operation;- quality assurance program for decommissioning.
Preparation of general Quality Assurance Program as well as separate contractor’s Quality
assurance programs is the responsibility of an operating organization, which maintains control
of QAP implementation at separate life cycle stages.
The Programs are developed in compliance with requirements set by nuclear power use
authority.

108

Kazakhstan-Specific-Part II. Specific Site Safety Assessment of LLW Repository1.

General Considerations for Safety Assessment
As part of the project for the construction of near surface long-term storage/disposal
facility of RW, the works on safety assessment, specifically on assessment of environmental
impact of the storage/disposal facility and its radiation safety assessment for personnel andpopulation are ongoing. These works are carried out taking into account: possible external
effects of natural and (or) technogenic feature; possible migration of radioactive substances;prevention of damage for population and environment as a result of storage/disposal facility
operation or as a result of occurrence of incidents or accidents. In addition, as part of theseworks, the public is provided with information about the safety of such facility.
1.1. Purpose of Safety Assessment
The objective of long-term storage/disposal is placement and isolation of RW in such a
way to exclude an unacceptable risk to human health, long-standing damage to the environment
both during the period of long-term storage/disposal operation and after its closure.
The purpose of safety assessment for storage/disposal facility is to demonstrate that thefacility can be constructed and operated in accordance with safety criteria defined by the current
regulatory legal documents.

1.2. Regulatory Requirement (Limit, Risk)
Since the storage/disposal facility, even after its closure, can pose a potential threat tohuman health, it is necessary to forecast the expected consequences and develop safetymeasures to protect future generations. Taking into account the most probable possible waysof the facility’s evolution after its closure, the project should specify that the dose forecast forthe population does not exceed 0.1 of the dose limit established by radiation safety standards,
and the collective annual dose for the critical group of the population does not exceed 1 persSv.
Under the conditions of normal operation of the facility, the limits of doses of technogenic
exposure during the year are established on the basis of the following values of individual
lifetime radiation risk: 10-3 for personnel and 5·10-5 for the population. Negligible risk level is10-6 .
The waste relevant for near surface disposal should have the following properties:- aggregation state. The wastes acceptable for disposal should be only in solid form. The
wastes in liquid form shall be solidified with a low leachability (less than 10-3 g/cm2·day for
Cesium 137 and Strontium 90);
- density. In order to minimize the volume and reduce the possible leaching area, the waste
should be compressed;- radionuclide composition and activity of radionuclides in the package. Radionuclide
composition of wastes, specific and total activity of radionuclides in the package (maximal and109

Kazakhstan-Specificaverage values for the complex) must satisfy the restrictions established by design of thestorage/disposal facility;- thermal stability. The waste must be stable to degradation due to residual heat release
after disposal and exposure of external thermal sources;- stability. The waste should be sufficiently stable in order to address the requirements of
the Rules together with the natural and engineering barriers of the disposal facility under theconditions of the intended mechanical, chemical, thermal, radiation and biological influences.
The form of waste or package may maintain waste stability. Medium level waste should remainstability for at least 300 years;- toxicity. The content of chemically toxic, poisonous, pathogenic and infectious
substances in the waste should be determined with sufficient accuracy and limited as much asreasonably possible;- chemical stability. The content of strong oxidizing agents, chemically and corrosiveactive and unstable substances in the waste is not allowed. The waste must not be decomposed
and release gases and vapors;- chemical compatibility. The content of stable complexable substances, as well as
possible chemical transformations in the waste, which may increase their migration capacity inthe future, should be taken into account at the stage of preparation for waste disposal.
Medium-level waste (Table 1), containing long-lived radionuclides with semi-half decay
period more than 30 years, excepting transuranium ones, with a total specific alpha activity
more than 104 kBq/kg and/or transuranium radionuclides with a total specific activity morethan 102 kBq/kg should be disposed in such a way that the upper level will be at least 5 metersfrom the day surface, or provided with barriers against unintentional penetration with a service
life of at least 500 years.
Classifying criteria of waste as radioactive and their separation into low- and mediumlevel waste by specific activity and radionuclide composition, as well as separation of waste
by dose rate of gamma radiation at a distance of 0.1 m from the surface are established in theEnvironmental Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Solid waste is recognized as radioactive
when:- specific activity of radionuclides in the waste is greater than values and its total activity
exceeds minimum significant activity (MSA);- equivalent (exposition) dose (EDR) rate exceeds 0.3 µSv/hour (30 µR/hour) above thenatural background for gamma-emitting radionuclides, but for sealed ionizing radiation sources(IRS) exceeds 1 µSv/hour (100 µR/hour) at a distance of 0.1 m from IRS;
- specific activity under undetermined radionuclide composition exceeds: 100 kBq/kg
for beta-emitting sources; 10 kBq/kg – for alpha emitting sources; 1.0 kBq/kg – fortransuranium radionuclides.

110Kazakhstan-Specific

Table 4 – Classification of Liquid and Solid Radioactive Waste upon Specific Activity
Specific activity, kBq/kg
Category of wastes

Low-Level
Medium-Level

Beta-emitting
radionuclides

Alpha-emitting
radionuclides(excepting
transuranium)

Transuranium
radionuclides

less 103less 102

less 101

from 103 to 107

From 102 to 106

from 101 to 105

1.3. Time Frame of Assessment (Operation 50 yrs, Institutional Control 300)
The duration of the specified monitoring and control period is justified at the design stageof the disposal site considering composition and nature of the waste, its specific and total
activity, as well as the projected activity at the disposal site in the future and the gained
experience of the information storage. The specified monitoring and control period should not
be less than 100 years. The operation period is not limited by standards.
2. Specific LLW Repository site (planning etc.)
2.1. RW Sources in RK
The RW available in the Republic of Kazakhstan are represented: by the waste of uranium
mining, oil and gas production, metallurgic branches of the industry as stockpiles, tailingstorages, contaminated soils, tubes, equipment. Also RW represented as liquid and solid wastes
from decommissioning the fast reactor BN-350 in Aktau and operating research reactors in
Alatau settlement and in Kurchatov; ampoule ionizing radiation sources which are used invarious sectors of the industry, medicine and agriculture, and which are time-expired andrequired to be disposed; as well as contaminated territories and equipment in the result of
nuclear tests conducted in Kazakhstan.
At present, the Republic of Kazakhstan has sufficiently complete and centralized
information on spent IRS (maintained by Committee of Atomic Energy Supervision andControl CAESC), RW originated from the operating and decommissioning reactors(maintained by the enterprises and presented in the consolidated manner to CAESC), and wasteof uranium mining and uranium processing industry (maintained by the enterprises andpresented in the consolidated manner to CAESC).
The information of wastes generated from the nuclear weapon tests and radiological
warfare agents (RWA) as well as wastes of the mining, coal and oil and gas industries isinsufficient and requires surveys and formation of RW cadaster.
2.2. RW Storage/Disposal Facilities Available in RK
Low and medium level waste from BN-350 reactor are placed in a structure representing
two parallel-located earth trenches in volume of 4590 m3 and 3910 m3. After filling, the111

Kazakhstan-Specifictrenches are backfilled with ground in layer thickness not less than 0.5 meter and covered by
concrete (asphalt). About 6418 tons of low level and about 642 tons of medium level waste of
total activity about 4.4·104 GBq are placed in the storage.
Liquid (from 6 to 24 m3 per a year, activity of up to 3 GBq) and solid (from 50 to 500 kg
per a year, activity of up to 14 GBq) waste from RR WWR-K are cemented and transported toa near surface storage facility, located at RR site. The total activity of waste, that have been
disposing since 1988 in the current facility, designed for liquid and solid wastes, currently
composes 328011 GBq.
Average speed of radioactive wastes accumulation at IGR, IVG.1M and RA reactor
complexes is as follows: solid RW – 300…400 kg/year; liquid RW – 2.0…3.0 m3/year.
Accumulated radioactive wastes are transported in prescribed manner to long-term storage
facility at research reactor complex (RRC) “Baikal-1” located in Kurchatov. The quantity ofsolid radioactive wastes at RRC “Baikal-1”, referred to the enterprise’s own accumulations,composes 184 501.87 kg with total activity – 4923·GBq. Total quantity of RW, placed for longterm storage at RRC “Baikal-1” including RW, received from outside (enterprises,organizations, ownerless), composes 2 722 490.48 kg with total activity– 6876 GBq.
RRC “Baikal-1” is one of the main enterprises of republican significance engaged in
temporary storage of IRS (ionizing radiation source). Besides, IRS storage facilities operate in
Kazakhstan as part of the following organizations: LLP “MAEK-Kazatomprom” (Aktau), JSC“Ulba-Metallurgical Plant” (Ust-Kamenogorsk), as well as a storage for low and medium level
IRS in RSE “INP RK” (Almaty) and LLP “Kazfosfat” in Taraz city. The last one is supposed
to be decommissioned and sources should be transported to RRC “Baikal-1”. All mentioned
facilities are licensed for a long-term storage of RW.
The following facilities are designed for wastes management originated from uranium
mining and uranium processing industries available in the Republic of Kazakhstan:- tailing storage of Stepnogorsk Mining and Chemical Plant LLP (SMCP), located 25 km
away from Stepnogorsk and 160 km away from Kazakhstan’s capital. Hydrometallurgical plant(HMP) processes beside design products – uranium-bearing ore – natural uranium concentrates
as well, received from enterprises of the “Kazatomprom” National Nuclear Company”.
Industrial sewage waters are drained to the tailing storage, consisting of three tanks (cells) inarea of 757 ha (cell # 1 – 162 ha, cell # 2 – 270 ha, evaporation cell – 303 ha and intermediatepumping and sludge pipes – 22 ha) with total quantity of 49.1 mln tons of highly dispersedradioactive slurry. Environmental system can guarantee the object safety when stable working
conditions are provided. Due to modernization realized the plant operability exceeded thedesign capacity and composed 4000 tons of uranium ore per a year. To cover uranium tailings
with low-toxic solid wastes of copper-molybdenum industry a molybdenum concentration
plant is constructed for ore processing at available capacities of LLP SMCP. Today the tailingstorage contains 41979 thous. cub. m. (49116 thous. tons) of low level waste with total activity
112

Kazakhstan-Specificof 7100 TBq;
- liquid low level wastes are placed in 5 evaporation cells of Shantobe deposit, LLP SMCP,
located 450 km away from Stepnogorsk and 420 km away from Nur-Sultan of total area 6.5 ha.
Currently 181.4 thous. tons (178 thous. cub. m) of LRW with total activity of 1752 GBq are at
the deposit;- “Koshkar-Ata” tailing storage of the former Pre-Caspian Mining and Metallurgical
Combine located near Aktau. “Koshkar-Ata” tailing storage contains 120000000 cub. m of RW.
Remediation program on the tailing storage has been implementing since 2006;- UMP tailing storage (cell). Waste are placed in tailing dam facility within “UMP” JSC.
Receiving tanks in tailing dam facility of open type meant for liquid waste are made in form ofponds (cells) that accumulate drainage and slimes, with partial evaporation. Since 2014, total
quantity of RW composed 6411667.7 cub.m with total activity of 194 GBq;
- there are two RW storage facilities within PV-1 and PV-2 industrial sites of 10000 cub.
m storage capacity and 16 cub. m correspondingly, JE “Inkay” NAC-Kazatomprom(Kazakhstan) and Cameco Corporation (Canada), located 10 kilometers northward from
Taykonur settlement in Suzaksk region, South-Kazakhstan oblast;- RW storage facilities at “Kanzhugan” deposit, with 7200 cub.m. storage capacity, owned
by LLP “Taukent Mining and Chemical Enterprise”, Taukent settlement, Suzaksk region,
South-Kazakhstan oblast;- RW storage facilities of 10000 cub.m storage capacity, owned by JSC “RU-6”, located
90 km away from Shieli settlement, Kyzylordinskaya oblast- RW storage facilities of 80000 cub. m. storage capacity, owned by JSC “Stepnoye Radio
Control”, Kyzemshek settlement, Sozakskiy region, South-Kazakhstan oblast, which was put
into operation in 2007.
There is a facility for pipes and metal equipment decontamination meant for RW
management of oil industry in Mangystau region. Areas are arranged at Kalamkas andZhetybay deposits in Mangystau region for pipes and equipment decontamination. Radioactive
waste storage facilities are launched in Zhetybay and Zhana-Ozen deposits of designed volume
as 100 thous. t (Zhana-Ozen) and 70 thous. t (Zhetybay).
2.3. Proposed long-term storage/disposal facilities
Application is currently under consideration in the RK for construction of near surface
storage facility of radioactive waste (hereinafter NSRWSF), resulted from remediation activity
at Semipalatinsk Test Site (STS) radioactive contaminated areas. The RW is a surface layer ofnatural soil contaminated by technogenic radionuclides as a result of radiological warfare
testing.
Location for NSRWSF is proposed at “Experimental Field” site of the former STS.

113

Kazakhstan-Specific2.1.1. Infrastructure
Proposed location has necessary transport and engineering infrastructure: there is a motor
road of 48 km from the location to nearest town (Kurchatov). Kurchatov town has motor roadto Semey town (130 km) and Pavlodar town (250 km). There is a hard surfaced road network
inside the town. Trunk railway line Semey-Pavlodar goes through the suburb of Kurchatov
town.
Electric power for radioactive waste storage facility shall be delivered from existing
power supply line.
2.1.2. Parameters of storage/repository
Basic performance characteristics of NSRWSF are provided in table 5.
Table 5 – Basic Performance Characteristics of NSRWSF
Description

Value

Designed site
Building area
Area of “dirty zone”
Area of “clean zone”
Reserved area for future construction
Design capacity of NSRWSF
Quantity of cells
Design capacity of one cell
RW activity
Operation term
Regulating ponds
Mound around site
Ring canal around site
On-site roads
Fencing
Number of regular staff, involved in operation
Preliminary diagram of NSRWSF is given in Figure 1.

114

18.57 ha3.84 ha18.37 ha0.2 ha2.14 ha
100 000 m3
812500 m3
Low-active
50 years
3360 m2
13895.4 m37417 m2
1.63 km
1726 m16 pers

Kazakhstan-SpecificFigure 1 – Preliminary Diagram of NSRWSF

2.1.3. Direct and Final Results
Direct results:– Volume of radioactive wastes to be disposed for long-term storage is about 100 000 m3;– Cleaned area is over 67.23 km2;
– Construction of radioactive waste storage facility, volume 100000 m3;– Activity of radionuclides to be disposed is (Bq):241
Am – 6.5×108;
137
Cs – 9.3×106;
239+240
Pu – 1.0×1010;
90
Sr – 3.4×1012.
Final results:– Solution of issue concerning RW utilization from contaminated area of the former STS;
– Improvement of radiation situation at STS area;– Reduction of radiation contamination risks at areas adjacent to testing site area,
reduction of impact to environment and human health.

115

Kazakhstan-Specific3.

Guidelines for Safety Assessment
Safety assessment requirements for RW storage/disposal are mainly determined by two
regulatory documents of RK: “Safety Manual for Near Surface Radioactive Waste Disposal”
and Technical guideline “Nuclear and Radiation Safety”.
According to the documents, a comprehensive safety analysis shall be executed fordesigned facility considering whole operation term and post-closure term, prior to constructstorage/disposal facility.
Safety assessment is a procedure for evaluating functional parameters of storage/disposal
facility and, in particular, its potential radiological consequences for health of people andenvironment.
With an analysis, special attention is paid to assessment of various ways and mechanisms,
which may lead to exposure of people during operation of facility and after its closure.
Assessment includes quantitative assessment of radiation consequences for the mostadverse scenario of negative events during operation and after its closure, and assessment of
impact in case of unintentional penetration after termination of control period.
Safety assessment includes the following stages:– setting a goal of assessment, safety requirements and operational (functional)
characteristics of storage/disposal facility;– collecting information and description of storage/disposal facility including proper formof wastes, characteristics of site and engineering structures;– determination of factors, events and processes, which may influence long-term safety ofstorage/disposal facility;– development and testing conceptual and mathematic model of behavior of facility andits components;– determination of initial events and description of scenarios of their developments;– determination of ways of possible radionuclides migration from storage/disposal facility
to environment;– assessment of results of conceptual and mathematical modelling;– estimation of assessment error;– comparison of assessment results and specified design criteria;– conclusions on feasibility of requirements established by effective regulatory documents
concerning safe use of nuclear power, both in operation and after its closure, including risk
assessment in terms of storage/disposal facility negative impact to health of critical group of
population.
Results of safety assessment are submitted to nuclear power use authority as a report on
safety analysis being a part of supporting documents to license request for construction ofstorage/disposal facility.

116

Kazakhstan-Specific4.

Confidence Building
Activity performed at the former Semipalatinsk Test Site caused radiophobia among
population of Kazakhstan. That is not easy to regain the trust of people who suffered from
nuclear weapon testing. For many years, people were unaware of the truth concerning
consequences of testing carried out at STS and public opinion in Kazakhstan was affected by
accidents that happened at Chernobyl NPP and Fukushima NPP.
Activity of every nuclear power enterprise and facility in the republic, as well as
implementation of any new project related to radiation or nuclear technologies is, therefore
treated by public as hazard in terms of environmental safety.
Thus, efforts aimed at reduction of radiophobia among population is one of high-priority
missions in the Republic of Kazakhstan that means confidence-building to radiation andnuclear technologies. This is achieved by sharing information to the maximal extend
concerning environmental safety of all nuclear power facilities, and state control inenvironmental protection maintained by Ministry of Energy of RK.
Promoting public awareness is a part of research program approved by Government of
RK. Means for the effort are different – meetings with population, scientific conferences,
workshops, round table discussions, tours to the sites of nuclear power enterprises, such as
National Nuclear Center, Kazatomprom, etc.
Public hearing with participation of non-governmental organizations and public is aneffective means. The hearings are held prior to implementation of any radiation or nuclear
hazardous project, or after completion of the project activity. Public hearing is held both in big
cities of the Republic and back country.
Considerable attention is paid to Mass Media. This provides television or radio
broadcasting (news, analytical, interactive), information releases, speeches, reports withcomments from representatives of governmental agencies and national companies. Leading
specialists of national companies are also invited to give explanations if necessary.
Brochures and booklets are being published about peaceful use of atomic power, andresults of latest radioecological researches at STS and adjacent areas.
Special attention is paid to training of journalists who are about to deal with the nuclear
industry development issues. For the purpose, there are trainings for journalists in the Republic.
In order to deliver reliable information and form unified information policy, government
Central communication service organizes press conferences and briefings, where radioecology
and nuclear power leading specialists give explanations.
There are materials published in special periodicals as “Human.Energy.Atom”, “Nuclear
society of Kazakhstan”, etc. which are distributed among population free of charge. Creative
products (printed, videography, photo report, collage) regarding nuclear power are being
developed and promoted.
It is noted in application documents for NSRWSF construction (see p. エラー! 参照元
117

Kazakhstan-Specificが見つかりません。), that right established information support of the NSRWSF design andfurther remediation of separate STS areas allows first, to reduce radiophobia among population,
caused by availability of open, uncontrolled areas of radionuclide contamination, second,
improve reputation of state authority inside the country and reputation of the country at worldstage. This in its turn will have good effect on investment attractiveness of the region. With
design’s safety assessment, attention is focused on confidence-building to evaluation methods
and results, in particular: applicability of computer software (calculation codes) is based oncomparative calculations and analysis of their sensitivity to changes in initial parameters,
analytical methods and applied simulators; quality assurance programs shall be developed at
all stages of lifecycle for consecutive implementation; independent expertise for safetyassessment data can be conducted upon request of public or regulatory body.

118

MALAYSIA

119Malaysia-General

MALAYSIA-Part I. General Outline of LLW Repository1.

General Policy

1.1. Radioactive waste management plan
Malaysia has recognized the need to construct a national low level repository to disposeradioactive waste generated from research institutions, medical and selected waste from theindustries. The siting process to identify potential areas has begun in 2011, via a site screening
campaign nationwide. In 2013, works on national repository project have slowed down, giving
more focus on the Borehole Disposal Project for the disposal of Disused Sealed Radioactive
Sources. This is consistent with the overall waste management plan where the repository isplanned to be constructed in 2040. The repository is expected to have a service life of tens ofyears, which specific period is yet to be further defined. The timeline for the project is
depicted in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Overview of the Near Surface Repository project milestone

1.2. Legal Frame work : Act & Regulation
According to Act 304 on the disposal of radioactive waste;“Any radioactive waste cannot be disposed of, accumulated or transported without priorauthorization in writing and subject to such conditions imposed. The appropriate authority
may direct the licensee or any person who is responsible for premises, nuclear installation,
conveyance or site where any situation or condition endangering life, health, property or theenvironmental to adopt such measure as would eliminate or protect against such situation orcondition. “120Malaysia-General

Current governing regulation with regards to radioactive waste management is bounded in the
Atomic Energy Licensing (Radioactive Waste Management) 2011.
1.3. Safety Objective
The safety objective for this project is to site, design, construct, operate and close a Low Level
Waste Repository so that protection after its closure is optimized. The overall safety objectives
are to demonstrate that:The repository provides long-term isolation and containment for the low level waste;
The pre-closure and post-closure safety criteria are met;
The repository system is robust,
The repository can be constructed, operated and closed safely; andThe performance of the repository meeting all relevant standards for safety

1.4. Disposal Strategy
The repository is dedicated to dispose low level waste that meet the waste acceptance criteria,
in a near surface facility. The exact depth of the facility will be determined via detail sitecharacterization study of the site.
2.

Principles and Safety Assessment

2.1. Fundamental safety principles
The ten safety principles established in the IAEA Fundamental Safety Principles are applied in
all radioactive waste management activities including the disposal of radioactive waste. The
repository is designed in a manner that it constitutes inherent parts of the safety strategy likethe isolation, passive safety, containment, and robustness of the system, as explained in thesubsequent sub-sections below.
2.2. Isolation of Radioactive Waste
Isolation of the waste away from human and the biosphere is provided by disposing of thewaste at depths of greater than 30 m. The site to be selected will have low probability of
intrusion and excavation since the site will be selected from an area that has no natural
resources (oil, gas and minerals, precious stones).
2.3. Application of passive safety
Passive safety ensures that the long term performance of the repository system does not relyon the active measures in ensuring the protection to human and the environment. Passive safety
is provided by engineered barrier and complemented by natural barrier of the host rock.
2.4. Containment, Robustness of the System, and Application of the Defence in Depth Principle
Containment, robustness and defence-in-depth would be provided by a combination of121

Malaysia-Generalengineered and natural barriers to radionuclide release and migration, together with theappropriate management and administrative controls over operations. This combination of
barriers provides multiple safety functions.
2.5. Management of Uncertainties
Uncertainties are inherent to the safety case development process. Technical uncertainties
encountered during the course of this project will be resolved through experimental analysis,
demonstration session and hands-on training. As for the post-closure safety assessment, three
general different types of uncertainties are:•Uncertainties in the future evolution of the system (scenario uncertainty). Thisis treated by performing assessments for various scanarios that account foralternative evolutions of the system.

•

Model uncertainties including conceptual, mathematical, and computer model
uncertainties. This can be managed by using established models and computer
tools such as RESRAD, ECOLEGO, and AMBER.

•

Data and parameter uncertainties will be minimized by performing sensitivity
analyses for key parameters and performing studies with simplified models.

2.6. Application of Graded Approach
The IAEA recommends application of graded approach in the selection of disposal option
hence the ability of a chosen disposal system to contain the waste and isolate it from humans
and the accessible biosphere is commensurate with the hazard potential of the waste. According
to para 3.24, Principle 5 – Optimization of Protection of the Fundamental Safety Principles(IAEA, 2006)“3.24. The resources devoted to safety by the licensee, and the scope and stringency ofregulations andtheir application, have to be commensurate with the magnitude of theradiation risks and their amenability to control.”The graded approach in this project takes rationale from the inventory aspects, safety, security,
costs and economics, including development of technical capacity and competencies.
3.

Safety Criteria (Dose limit/ Dose constraint for Occupational worker and Public)

From the radiological protection aspect, control of the exposure or the radiological impact isbound in the Atomic Energy Licensing (Basic Safety Radiation Protection) Regulation 2010,that specifies the public dose limit of 1 mSv/yr. This implies that the sum of dose to the publicfrom all pathways from a reasonably foreseeable event and processes do not pose a radiologicaldose impact of more than 1 mSv/yr. To ensure the limit is conformed, the post-closure safety
122Malaysia-General

assessment applies the dose limit as one of the safety criteria. For radiation workers dealing
with the packaging, transferring, emplacement, operation and closing of the future repository,
the safety criterion is set to be 20 mSv/yr, as stipulated in the same regulation.
4.

Operational System Preparation

4.1. Responsibility to Develop and Operate of Waste Repository
Malaysian Nuclear Agency, who is entrusted to run the National Radioactive Waste
Management Centre, will be the lead agency to develop this facility. In addition tostrengthening the technical capacity and capabilities required to perform the studies required
for this project, potential collaboration with technical agencies such as Mineral and Geological
Department, Remote Sensing Malaysia, and Universities are foreseen and expected to be
carried out in stages according to the project progress. Construction will be carried out as per
government’s procurement process by open tender. The Radioactive Waste Management
Centre is expected to operate the facility.
5.

Site Selection

5.1. Site screening
A national area survey site screening was performed back in 2011. The report underwent two
IAEA peer review missions, with recommendations to further improve the works and chart theway forward for the siting process.
5.2. Site selection Criteria
A suitable site for repository embodies long-term stability and attributes that will enable thewastes to be isolated so that there is no unacceptable risk to people or the environment either
while it is operating or after the site has been closed. Criteria for site selection include natural
physical characteristics as well as socioeconomic, ecological and land-use factors.
The repository site should be built in area with less vegetation.
The repository site should be constructed on clay-rich soils
The repository site should be located on an area with low precipitation
The repository site should be built on an area of low landslide potential as well as low
density of lineamentThe repository site should be located on a terrain with a slope between 5 to 15 degrees
to prevent erosion



The repository site should be constructed on an area which less influence ofgroundwater in order to restrict the transport of radionuclides

The repository site should be constructed on elevated area between 50 to 300 metersfrom mean sea level which considered as area free of flooding123Malaysia-General

5.3. Exclusion CriteriaThe repository site shall not be built on protected land area, which has economics andsecurity values. The site, therefore, should not be built on gazette forested land, nationalparks, historical area, archaeological importance and surface water bodies.
The repository site shall not be built on island due to public concern regarding the sea
transport of waste might be expected.
Site area is within 5km away from urban area.
6.

Design, Construction and Operation of the LLW Repository

6.1. Estimated cost and Funding
The estimated costs and funding mechanism have not been deliberated so far. However, it isanticipated that the fund to develop and construct the repository facility will be borne by theGovernment of Malaysia.
6.2. Conceptual design
A conceptual design for a near surface repository was developed back in 2005 based on thecollated data then. The proposed design is based on a concrete vault type as shown in Figure 2.
The initial design concept comprises 4 vaults. Dimension of each vault is 12m x 5mx 4m, withestimated volume of 240 m3. Each vault can cater up to 800 drums of 200 liter capacity. The
near surface facility will also be equipped with building(s) for supporting activities such as
security house, transit (interim) storage, administrative and services.
No review of the conceptual design is performed yet to date.

Figure 2 : Initial Conceptual Design of the Near Surface Repository

124

Malaysia-General

6.3. Basic engineering design
No engineering design is developed at this stage yet. However, it is believed that the project
can benefit and emulate from one existing near surface repository in Malaysia built for the
disposal of thorium waste and thorium contaminated waste. This repository was built for the
Asian Rare Earth company and was fully constructed and operated by the GSM Consulting.
This facility is now at the post-closure phase.
6.4. Inventory
The current projected waste inventory volume for disposal at the near surface repository is
2200m3. Breakdown of this projection is depicted in Table 1.
Table 1: Breakdown of estimated waste inventory for disposal in repository

Type of Solid Waste

Example of waste stream

Projection of accumulated volume
in 30 years

Operational Waste

Compacted waste
Un-compacted waste

1250m34m3Spent Resin
Contaminated items in
the Interim Stor

Bulky metal items
Structures
HDPE Drums
Pipes
Heat Exchanger

80 m3

Research sample

Sludge, tin slag

3m3

Reactor
Decommissioning

Internal core components
40 m3
Operational waste(Not included is concrete
cement from biologicalshield)Radioactive Sources

Pre-conditioned sources in 12 m3
cementDSRS
Depleted Uranium

Solidified waste

Liquid and organic waste 140m3
solidified in cement or
absorbed in saw dust

Thorium Plant
Decommisioning

Structures
Sludge and residue
125

250m3

Malaysia-General

Solidified
waste

liquidorganic

LLETP
Decommissioning

Structures,
Equipment

Tanks

and 300m3

Decommissioning
other laboratories in
Nuclear Malaysia

Structures,
Equipment

Tanks

and

Existing waste fromprevious
Decommissioning

Concrete and soil

52m3
40m3

2,171 m3

Total Volume

6.5. Project Implementation
A master plan for the near surface repository project is drawn up for year 2019 till 2030. The
current emphasis is focusing on the siting and developing a generic safety assessment for therepository. It is planned than a candidate site will be determined by the end of 2030, hence
detailed site characterization follows and expected to be carried out in year 2030-2035.
Figure 3: Master Plan for the Near Surface Repository for the period of 2019-2030

For year 2019-2021, training for new project team member is given an emphasis. Training will
be provided mainly through the IAEA Technical Co-orperation Platform. The current running
IAEA TC project is TC MAL 7006 for the duration of 2018-2020. New TC project will beapplied in future for continuous assistance in the subject matter.
6.6. Quality assurance
Quality of a data will determine the quality of a safety assessment. As such, data management
is crucial for the repository project, amplified by the fact that a repository development phasespans a long time frame of more than 10 years. This is to ensure that data particularly on siting126

Malaysia-Generaldata such as maps, reports, analytical reports, are preserved, retrievable and traceable. A
training on data management is planned in Q1 2020 under the framework of IAEA TC project.

127

Malaysia-Specific-Part II. Specific Site Safety Assessment of LLW RepositoryReferring to the Borehole Disposal Facility for disposal of
Disused Sealed Radioactive Sources
1.

General Considerations for Safety Assessment

The Malaysian Nuclear Agency is proposing to construct a Borehole Disposal Facility (BDF)
for the disposal of disused sealed radioactive sources (DSRS) at its main complex located in
Kajang, Selangor. The assessment context specifies the purpose of the assessment which is toevaluate the post-closure performance and safety of the BDF, and was written for technicalaudience of the regulatory body Atomic Energy Licensing Board (AELB), International Atomic
Energy Agency (IAEA) and Nuclear Malaysia community.
---

Purpose of safety assessment
The main purpose of the assessment is to demonstrate the safety of the BDF as a safe
disposal facility for DSRS with a sufficient level of confidence.
Regulatory requirement (limit, risk)
The end points of the assessment are the measure of impact reported as radiation dose. The
radiation safety argument is based on a dose constraint (0.3 mSv/yr) or, if appropriate, arisk constraint (1 x 10-5 per year). Other safety indicator such as the concentration ofradionuclides, fluxes and the time for which the maximum dose is attained are alsopresented to support the radiation dose argument.
Time Frame of assessment
In the assessment, 30 years was conservatively taken as the period of institutional control.
No cut-off time was specified for the calculations in order to demonstrate that the time ofpeak calculated dose has occurred.
Description of the Repository System
BDF System

The BDF system consists of near field components (theBDF itself), geosphere components and the biospherecomponents. The disposal borehole is 260 mm in diameterand is drilled to a depth of 175.5 m. It comprises thefollowing distinct zones:a) 115 m effective disposal zone;b) 60 m closure zoned) 0.5 m borehole plug

Waste Packages

A waste package consists of sources, a capsule, acontainment barrier (cement) and a disposal container.
Capsules and containers are made from stainless steel
128

Malaysia-Specific

316L. There are allocations for 60 waste packages for
disposal.

Fig 1. Schematic diagram of the near field components in the BDF-

Waste acceptance criteria
DSRSs that is planned to be disposed are 15 species of radionuclides in Cat 3-5 conditioned
into 60 capsules, total activity 1.18 TBq (30.19 Ci). Excluded are liquid waste, neutron
source, plutonium and its isotopes, uranium, thorium, depleted uranium and larger size
DSRS that doesn’t fit in the capsule.

-

Site
The final site was chosen based on siting criteria, practicality and political considerations.
Having the BDF constructed in Nuclear Malaysia, the facility will benefit from the current
arrangements of the security, radiological monitoring and control system.

2.

Guidelines for Safety Assessment
Detailed site characterization program was performed for the Borehole Project from 20132017. The program covers study of regional geology, regional lithology, topography,hydrology, hydrogeology, hydro-geochemistry, seismicity. Also evaluated are the slope
stability analysis of the site.

-

Base line data
Meteorological data (rain, temperature etc), and Population and land use from theMunicipality Development Plan. Data on climate change pattern extracted from the129

Malaysia-SpecificIntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report 2002.
-

Detailed site specific parameters
Geosphere

The reference site for the borehole disposal facility is
located in crystalline weathered rock area which is saturated
with the water table at 27 m below the ground surface. It is
underlain by metamorphic rocks of the Kenny Hill
Formation which is made up of predominantly psammitic
schist of sandstone origin and phyllite. There are minor joint
sets trending in N-S and E-W directions. The rocks tend to
break or split along the foliation/schistosity planes.
Hydrogeological
low yield of groundwater
groundwater flow velocities ranging 2.23 to 4.34 x 10-4 m/s.
Geochemistry
Acidic (pH 4.55 to 5.08)
Eh value (22.24 mV to 118.89mV)
Sulphate, chloride and calcium concentrations are 3.40
mg/l, 7.91 mg/l, and 3.76 mg/l respectively-

Geology setting

The reference site has undulating topography with the land
above the BDF being 70 m above mean sea level.
No natural resources
No sources of geothermal heat or gas
Seismically low probability

Biosphere

A river (Sungai Semenyih) 1300m from the site runs in thesouthwest direction.
The Semenyih Water Treatment plant is located 5 km fromthe site. Estimated population around Nuclear Malaysia
up to 6km radius is 95,110 people.
Land use around 5km radius constitutes a mixture of mainly
agricultural land, institutions and housing area.

Scenario130Malaysia-Specific

Based on the considerations of the external factors and FEP (feature, event and process)analysis, the following scenarios were identified and justified for the system.
Design Scenario

The disposal system will evolve and the engineering barrier
will fail eventually due to natural degradation. Radionuclides
will be released and transported by groundwater along the
groundwater flow direction and discharge into a river.

Alternative Scenario-Defect Scenario

Four Defect Scenario variants were identified.
 D1: welding defect in one waste container D2: welding defect in one waste capsule D3: degradation time for cement and near fieldcomponents is reduced by a factor of 10 compared to thereference criteria D4: welding defect in one waste package (capsule+container)

Alternative Scenario-Well Scenario-

The groundwater is assumed to be abstracted from thegeosphere via an abstraction borehole that is drilled 100m at
the start of the post-institutional control period.

Formulation and Implementation of models
The calculation was performed using AMBER 6.0. Input data consists of collection ofsite-specific data from site characterization and laboratory analysis, published Malaysiandata and generic data generated from a range of sources.

Example of a representative scenario:

Fig.2: Design Scenario - Liquid Release in Saturated Zone with River as the GeosphereBiosphere Interface

131Malaysia-SpecificFig.3: Calculated Annual Dose for the Design Scenario

3.

Confidence Building-

Management of uncertainties (Scenario, input data and model)
The uncertainties recognized have been bounded by the calculations carried in theassessment. Uncertainties in the post-closure safety assessment arise from three sources
namely:a. Uncertainty in the evolution of the disposal system and the changes of humanbehaviour over the timescales of interest (scenario uncertainty)
b. Uncertainty in the conceptual, mathematical and computer models used tosimulate the behaviour and evolution of the disposal system (model uncertainty )c. Uncertainty in the data and parameters used as inputs in the modelling (parameter
uncertainty)-

Peer Reviews
1x Expert Mission on Site Characterization and Design of the BDF
1x Expert Mission on the Post-Closure Safety Assessment
3x IAEA Peer review sessions on the Safety Case Report132Malaysia-SpecificFig 4. Factors towards ensuring safety of the people and environment, now and for future
generation

133

MONGOLIA

134

Mongolia-General

MONGOLIA-Part I. General Outline of LLW Repository1.

GeneralMongolia is a land-locked country in the Central Asia with large area of approximately
1.5 million square kilometers territory and a population of 3.23 million people. Mongolia isdeveloping country without nuclear power. Economic development in Mongolia has been
limited by the harsh climate, scattered population and sizeable expanses of unproductive land.
The infrastructure is not well developed, vehicular transport is slow. But our country is rich inmineral resources. The uranium industry in Mongolia was very important in the economy.
Nuclear power plants currently cost more to build than power plants using coal or gas.
Mongolia is a non-nuclear country, since there are no nuclear power plants and research
reactors.
2.

Present achievements

The hierarchy of Mongolia’s regulatory authorities for nuclear and radiation safety within
the overall administrative framework is shown in Figure 1. The administrative framework has
been subject to various changes and reorganisations over the past few years.

Figure 1: Hierarchy of Mongolia’s regulatory authorities for nuclear and radiation safety

On 2 March 2015, the Government of Mongolia accepted a resolution on establishing the
Nuclear Energy Commission (NEC). NEC is responsible for developing and implementing thenational policy on the exploitation of radioactive minerals and use of nuclear energy, the135Mongolia-General

1responsible for coordination activities to ensure nuclear safety and radiation protection, fordeveloping and adopting safety and security regulations, and for licensing of nuclear facilities.
The activities of the Nuclear and Radiation Regulatory Authority (NRRA) of the General
Agency For Specialised Inspection (GASI) and the Nuclear and Radiation Inspection Divisionof the Metropolitan Inspection Agency are largely focused on the control of: the uses ofradiation sources in industry, medicine and research centres, installation of portal monitors tocombat illicit trafficking of nuclear and radioactive materials, the exploitation, processing,import, export and transport of radioactive minerals.
The split of responsibilities of the former NEA to NEC and other organisations is shownin Figure 2.

Figure 2: Split of responsibilities of NEA’s successor organisations (since 2015) in the field ofradioactive minerals (may also become relevant for extraction of NORM minerals)

3.

Nuclear Energy Commission

The Amendment of the Nuclear Energy Law issued on February 13 of 2015, and The
Nuclear Energy Commission is responsible for the coordination of peaceful uses of radioactive
minerals and nuclear energy, research and development of nuclear technology and nuclear andradiation safety. Chairman of the Nuclear Energy Commission of Mongolia is The Prime
Minister of Mongolia. Members of The Commission, that provide nuclear technology matters,
technology transfer, and relevant issues; which have to be discussed in higher grade, are statesecretaries of Ministry’s and Seniors from governmental bodies and separated with each other.
The structure of the NEC is shown in
Figure 4.

136Mongolia-General

Figure 4. Structure of the Nuclear Energy Commission

4.

Framework

4.1. State policy and Nuclear Energy Law- National Security Concept of Mongolia,- Mongolia’s Sustainable Development Cencepts-2030- Law on Nuclear Weapon Free status,- State Policy on the Exploitation of Radioactive Minerals and Peaceful Uses of Nuclear
Energy,- Nuclear Energy Law of Mongolia, /2009/- Program for Implementation of the State Policy,- Government’s Action Plan for 2016-2020
4.2. New approved regulation, 2015-2018, based on IAEA safety standard, guidence andetc,.
- Radiation Safety Standard,- Basic radiation protection and safety standard,- Security of Radiation Sources,- Radioactive Waste Management from Mining and Milling of ore,
- Radiation Safety Procedures for Uranium Exploration,- Rule for Radiation Control Unit within the Radiation User Organizations,137

Mongolia-General

5.

Safety regulation on Portable Nuclear gauge,
Safety regulation on Fixed Nuclear gauge,
Safety regulation on Safe use of Sealed Radioactive Source in Borehole Logging,
Safety regulation on Radioactive Mineral’s Milling and Mining
Safety regulation on Transport Regulation for Radioactive Sources.

Radioactive waste management facility

The Isotope Center which is Radioactive waste management facility of Nuclear Energy
Commission is responsible for the safe storage of radiation sources and radioactive wastes andsafe transport of radioactive materials in Mongolia. Isotope center is an object of the state
protection by Governmental Resolution No 135
dated 26 May 2004. According toGovernmental Resolution No 135 (Internal troops operational regulation) and organizational
procedure for controlling the transport and people at the state essential properties Internal
troops of National police agency provides and implements safe and security activities of
Isotope center. Functions and activities of Isotope Centre on radiation safety have been
described in the Law on Nuclear Energy following:•

To take the appropriate steps to ensure that radiation protection, physical protection
and technical support of the radioactive waste management facility,•

To store, process and dispose nuclear materials, disused radioactive sources andradioactive wastes,•

To organize safe and secure storage, processing, disposal of radioactive waste, nuclear
waste and radioactive wastes from mining and milling of ores,••

To maintain nuclear and radioactive waste management,
To prepare relevant procedure, regulation, standard and to ensure their implementation.

The Law on Nuclear Energy, Article 11.3. “The state administrative authority shall havea special facility of national level to centrally store, transport and dispose of nuclear material,
nuclear waste and non-exploitable radioactive waste. This facility shall be the state restrictedobject.
The Isotope Centre has a long term waste storage facility which providing radiation
protection technical service in Mongolia. Orphan or abandoned radiation sources should besecured and stored at Isotope center without any charge and also functions and activities onradiation safety have been described in the Law of Mongolia on Nuclear Energy, 2015.
NEC and DOE Joint Program to Strengthen Physical Protection of the Isotope Center
since 2009, security of the Isotop center good cooperation with:138

Mongolia-General

139THE PHILIPPINES

140

The Philippines-General

THE PHILIPPINES-Part I. General Outline of LLW Repository1.

General Policy

The general policy for control of toxic and hazardous wastes is governed by the Republic Act
6969 entitled “Toxic Substances and Hazardous and Nuclear Wastes Control Act of 1990”.
However, it is limited in scope and only includes the prohibition of entry, even in transit, ofhazardous and nuclear wastes. On the other hand, the general policy for regulating peacefuluses of nuclear technology is governed by Republic Act 2067 and the Executive Order 128.
The current scope of these policies relevant to radioactive waste and spent fuel management
are however limited. The policies are being updated under the proposed bills: “Hazardous andRadioactive Wastes Management Act” and the “An Act Providing for a Comprehensive
Nuclear Regulatory Framework”.
2.

Principles and Safety Assessment

The principles of safety assessment adopted are according to the following: a) IAEA General
Safety Requirements (GSR) Part 3 – Radiation Protection and safety of Radiation Sources: Int'l.
Basic Safety Standards General and the PNRI Code of PNRI Regulations Part 3: "Standards
for Radiation Protection and Safety of Radiation Sources" and the b) Principles of safetyassessment for borehole disposal according to the IAEA TecDoc No. 1824 “Generic Postclosure Safety Assessment for Disposal of Disused Sealed Radioactive Sources in Narrow
Diameter Boreholes.
3.

Regulatory and Operational System Preparation

The Philippine Nuclear Research Institute (PNRI) – Nuclear Regulatory Division performs theregulatory functions in licensing and regulating the possession and use of nuclear andradioactive materials and facilities in support of international commitments on radiation
protection, nuclear safety, safeguards and security. There are five Sections that comprise theDivision: Regulations and Standards Development Section; Licensing Review and Evaluation
Section; Inspection and Enforcement Section; Nuclear Safeguards and Security Section; andRadiological Impact Assessment Section.
Regulations relevant to RWM have been developed through the Code of PNRI Regulations(CPR) among of which are: a) CPR Part 3: Standards for Protection Against Radiation, b) CPR
Part 4: Regulations for the Safe Transport of Radioactive Materials in the Philippines, c) CPR
Part 23: Licensing Requirements for Land Disposal of Radioactive Waste.

141

The Philippines-General

While there is an existing waste acceptance criteria (WAC) for the processing of wastes (pretreatment, treatment and conditioning) established by the operator of the Radioactive Waste
Management Facility and approved by the regulatory body, there has not yet WAC for interim
storage and for disposal. Naturally occurring radioactive materials are not consideredradioactive waste since it has not yet been regulated.
The country has no nuclear weapons and operating NPP and RR, thus most of the wastes arefrom industrial and medical uses. The facility currently manages Category 1-5 disused sealed
sources (DSRS), solid wastes, and liquid wastes. There are no spent fuel but there are in storage
about 130 TRIGA Fuel Elements for research reactor.
4.

Site Selection

The Philippine Nuclear Research Institute (PNRI) and its collaborators have been investigatinga proposed site as the final solution for the disposal of low-to-intermediate (LILW) level
radioactive waste and disused radioactive sources and waste arisings generated by hospitals,
industries, and research institutions including the PNRI nuclear facilities.
The strategy adopted was to co-locate 2 disposal facilities that will address the types ofradioactive waste generated from the use of radioactive materials taking advantage of thebenefits provided by shared infrastructure and R&D work. This strategy is expected tocompensate for the small volumes of waste generated in the Philippines as compared tocountries with big nuclear energy programs. A potential site was selection and for which
various site characterization studies were conducted.
It was concluded that the site can be developed as a near-surface disposal facility in thegeotechnical and geologic standpoint even though the initial hydrogeological findings reveals
that the site is underlain by highly fractured “andesitic volcaniclastics” mantled by residual
clayey with slight to moderate permeability, and groundwater in the area is relatively diluteand acidic due to the formation of sulfuric acid by the oxidation of the pyrite in the andesite.
5.

Design and Construction of Disposal Facilities

The concept design of the LILW disposal facility has the following design features andcharacteristics that is intended to manage both short and long-lived radionuclides:
Design characteristics
o Near-surface disposal facility
 To accommodate 50 m3 of conditioned waste
 To host 4 disposal pits
 Roofs are self supporting with enough reinforcement
 Roof designed to avoid bath-tubbing
142

The Philippines-GeneraloBorehole Disposal Facility
 Co-located with near surface disposal facility 100-meters deep, 70 meters – disposal zone, 30 meters – plugging zone,
diameter = 381-mm
 Capacity : 57 canisters

Co-disposal concept in the proposed site

As a way forward, further site characterization including a more detailed topographic map, soil
erosion study, further iteration of performance and safety assessment studies, drafting of asafety case report, and public acceptance campaign are among the activities that the PNRI
technical team are planning to do in the future.
There is currently no policy decision regarding the actual construction of the proposed facility.

143The Philippines-Specific-Part II. Specific Site Safety Assessment of LLW Repository1.

General Considerations for Safety Assessment

The general considerations for the safety assessment are:a) To demonstrate compliance with the Code of PNRI Regulations particularly Part 3:
Standards for Protection Against Radiation, CPR Part 23: Licensing Requirements for Land
Disposal of Radioactive Waste and other relevant regulations andb) To Justify that the design features of the RWMF (physical and procedural) can be operated
safely and effectively
2.

Specific LLW Repository site (planning etc.)• Predisposal:
The PNRI – Nuclear Services Division through the Radiation Protection Services Section
operates the national predisposal radioactive waste management facility (RWMF) for the
management and interim storage of radioactive wastes. The RWMF consists of three Trenches
where sources are stored, conditioning areas, compactor, chemical precipitation, decay storage
rooms among others.
The country has no operating NPP and RR, thus most of the wastes are from industrial andmedical uses. The facility currently manages Category 1-5 disused sealed sources (DSRS),
solid wastes, and liquid wastes. There are no spent fuel but there are in storage about 130
TRIGA Fuel Elements for research reactor. In terms of costs, the waste generator bears all
decommissioning and waste management costs.
The current strategies for the pre-disposal of wastes are the following:






DSRS - return to supplier, transfer to the RWMF or store in a licensed facility for decay.
For wastes processed at the RWMF, DSRS are dismantled, retrieved and encapsulated instainless steel capsules
Solid wastes are compacted and cemented in 200L drums
Liquid wastes - liquid aqueous wastes are incorporated in cement mixture in 200L drums.
the management strategy for organic liquid wastes has not been identified
Current Waste inventory: Solid – 52m3 1.6e9Bq; Liquid (Aqeous) – 1.6m33e10Bq, Liquid(Organic), DSRS – 2421 units 3.4e14 Bq• Disposal:
After the potential site for a permanent repository was selected using the IAEA site selection
criteria, site characterization studies were performed at the site to determine the geologic,hydrogeologic, and hydrologic properties, to establish and recommend monitoring networks
144

The Philippines-General

for atmospheric meteorological, hydrogeological, flora and fauna observations to establish
baseline environmental conditions, and other geotechnical and geophysical data that may beobtained from the study.
Performance assessment based on the conceptual model was performed using various
modelling softwares, namely Hydrus-1D for simulating the analysis of water and solutetransport, GMS Modflow for the groundwater modelling and AMBER for the biosphere, andother supporting tools.
A 2-D electrical resistivity survey was also commissioned to detect geological structures andlithological profiles for the presence of faults and fractures from the resulting profiles forproper location and design of proposed disposal facility.
Although the initial results show that the site has the potential to be suitable location, A more
expensive engineering intervention and mitigating measures are necessary which may include
appropriate engineered ground treatment (grouting), provision for surface drainage andtreatment to ensure non-contamination of surrounding downstream surface water, slope
stabilization measures involving extensive earthworks.
Public consultation was conducted with local decision makers, but it needs to be updated anda full stakeholders study need to be conducted3.

Guidelines for Safety Assessment•

Predisposal: Included in the current safety program. Includes identification of hazards,
calculation of doses, operating limits and conditions, etc. full safety case to be developed
once suitable training to the staff have been conducted.

•

Disposal: Drafted 1st Iteration Safety case developed and includes scenario analysis,among others

4.

Confidence Building•

Verification of models will be performed after the safety case is completed

145

THAILAND

146

Thailand-General

THAILAND-Part I. General Outline of LLW Repository1.

General Policy
 Radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel in Thailand will be safely managed to protect
human health and environment now and in the future in a sustainable and cost-effective
manner.
 The current and future financial responsibility for the management of radioactive waste
will be borne by the generator of the radioactive waste.
 The Government will ensure that funding set aside for this purpose will be preserved
for the time when it is needed.
 All radioactive waste management activities will be conducted in an open andtransparent manner and the relevant parties will make information on the safety ofradioactive waste management activities available to members of the public.
 Decisions regarding radioactive waste management will take into account the interestsand concerns of all interested and affected people.
 Thailand will commit to the international safety standards on radioactive waste and
SNF management in order to achieve and demonstrate a high level of safety.
 The license holders, who generate, process, or possess radioactive waste, will be
responsible for the safe management of radioactive waste, until the waste is acceptedby the waste management organization (TINT).
 The radioactive waste will be transferred to TINT within a timeframe specified in alicense The waste management organization (TINT) will be responsible for the safe
management of radioactive waste, including sealed radioactive sources that are not
usable or intended for further use.
 Radioactive sources for which owners cannot be identified (often referred to as “orphan
sources”) will be recovered by OAP and managed by TINT.
 Ultimately, all the radioactive waste in Thailand that cannot be recycled, discharged or
cleared from regulatory control will be disposed of in a licensed radioactive waste
disposal facility.

147

Thailand-General In a defined time scale, the Government of Thailand will investigate options for aradioactive waste disposal facility and assign the responsibility of managing such
facility to one of the government agencies.
2.

Principles and Safety Assessment Safety assessment is a procedure for evaluating the performance of a disposal systemand, as a major objective, its potential radiological impact on human health and theenvironment.
 The safety assessment of near surface repositories should involve consideration of the
impacts both during operation and in the post-closure phase.
 Potential radiological impacts following closure of the repository may arise from
gradual processes, such as degradation of barriers, and from discrete events that may
affect the isolation of the waste.
 The potential for inadvertent human intrusion can be assumed to be negligible while
active institutional controls are considered fully effective, but may increase afterwards.
 The technical acceptability of a repository will greatly depend on the waste inventory,
the engineered features of the repository and the suitability of the site.

3.

Regulatory and Operational System Preparation
 Nuclear Energy for Peace Act 2559 (2016) and Related regulations on Licensing of
Disposal of Radioactive Waste (Being drafted).
 Other safety requirements from the Thai Regulatory Body (Being drafted).
 Waste acceptance requirements
 The operator will use the national inventory to establish the waste acceptance criteria
and design of the facility.

4. Site Selection
4.1. Characteristics of acceptable site
4.1.1. Geological characteristics (seismic, fault activity and erosion, hydrogeology)
Study on Active Fault Zones in Thailand [1]Recently Department of Mineral Resources put an enormous effort to produce the active
fault map of Thailand (Fig. 1) with the co-operative research studies of Chulalongkorn
University (Thailand) and Akita University (Japan).
148

Thailand-General Detailed geodetic survey has been performed in detail to locate the appropriate site for
exploratory trenching.
 Detailed stratigraphic logging has been done prior to sampling for Quaternary dating
have been made.
 Based upon these consecutive sequences of work, we can delineate the Fault Zone (FZ),
which is herein defined as linear or elongate zone of seismicity commonly classified byneotectonic movement and coincident with major tectonic structures.
As displayedin Fig. 1.

Fig.1 The active fault map of Thailand

Thailand consists of 15 Active Fault Zones
 Researchers are now focusing their work on active faults in southern Thailand
following the recent minor earthquake in Phuket, which is not strong enough to cause
the island to sink as rumored in some quarters.
 Experts said that the Mae Chan fault - a major fault in the northern province of Chiang
Rai that is now building up stress - is no longer the only geological feature of interestin the country.

149Thailand-General Down south, the coastal Ranong fault is capable of triggering an earthquake ofmagnitude 5 to 6, although so far it has only caused small undersea tremors that did nothave enough power to create a tsunami.
The Ranong fault is thus an area of concern as it continues to build up Geological evidence
indicates that faults in southern Thailand like the Ranong and Khlong Malui faults havepreviously caused land earthquakes of magnitude 6-7 roughly 2,000 years ago.
Another major quake at these faults may happen at any time and is an impossible event topredict.”
Study on Earthquakes in Thailand [2]Fig 2. The Indo-Australian plate is colliding into the Eurasian plate at a speed of 70 millimeters per
year

Thailand sits on the Eurasian tectonic plate, which is flanked by the Indo-Australian andPacific plates. While the country is located in a region that is relatively safe from earthquakes,
but historical records show that the area has previously been affected by a number of tremors.
 Thailand has a number of active faults with the potential to trigger tremors, many ofwhich are concentrated in the northern and western regions.
 These faults do not have the capability to cause strong quakes like those in the Ring ofFire or in areas directly on top of tectonic plate boundaries.
 Over the past 40 years, Thailand has experienced mid-sized earthquakes (magnitudes
5.0-5.9) 8 times or once every 5 years.
 5 of these tremors struck in the north, while the other 3 were centered in the west.
150Thailand-General Virtually all earthquakes recorded in Thailand are under magnitude 6.0, althoughsignificant seismic activity in far-away locations like Indonesia or Myanmar can be felt
in areas with soft soil like Bangkok.
4.1.1.

Geological characteristics(seismic)

Which areas in Thailand are prone to earthquakes? [2]Fig 3. The following parts of Thailand have higher risks of experiencing tremors

The following parts of Thailand have higher risks of experiencing tremors:
1. Areas that may be affected by earthquakes: Krabi, Chumphon, Phang Nga, Phuket, Ranong,
Songkhla and Surat Thani.
2. Areas with soft soil, which may be affected by distant earthquakes:Bangkok, Nonthaburi,
Pathum Thani, Samut Prakan and Samut Sakhon.
3. Areas close to faults that may be affected by earthquakes: Kanchanaburi, Chiang Rai, Chiang
Mai, Tak, Nan, Phayao, Phrae, Lampang, Lamphun and Mae Hong Son

151

Thailand-General

4.1.2.

Climatic conditions (rainfall, extreme events)

Rainfall Map in Thailand [3]Fig 4. Rainfall Map in Thailand

Rainfall Upper Thailand usually experiences dry weather in winter because of thenortheast monsoon which is a main factor that controls the climate of this region. Later period,
summer, is characterized by gradually increasing rainfall with thunderstorms. The onset of thesouthwest monsoon leads to intensive rainfall from mid-May until early October. Rainfall peakis in August or September which some areas are probably flooded. However, dry spells arecommonly occur for 1 to 2 weeks or more during June to early July due to the northward
movement of the ITCZ to southern China.
Rainy season in the Southern Part is different from upper Thailand. Abundant rain occurs
during both the southwest and northeast monsoon periods. During the southwest monsoon theSouthern Thailand West Coast receives much rainfall and reaches its peak in September. On
the contrary, much rainfall in the Southern Thailand East Coast which its peak is in November
remains until January of the following year which is the beginning of the northeast monsoon.
According to a general annual rainfall pattern, most areas of the country receive 1,200 - 1,600mm a year. Some areas on the windward side, particularly Trat province in the Eastern Partand Ranong province in the Southern Thailand West Coast have more than 4,500 mm a year.
Annual rainfall less than 1,200 mm occurs in the leeward side areas which are clearly seen in
the central valleys and the uppermost portion of the Southern Part.

152

Thailand-General

4.1.3.

Physical site characteristics (flooding, draining, land gradients)

Floods in Thailand Are Regular Natural Disasters [4]Fig .5 Floods in Thailand Are Regular Natural Disasters

Population density of Thailand with major rivers. (Source: AIR)
Twelve of Thailand’s 14 southern provinces recently experienced major flooding resulting
from several days of heavy precipitation from an active northeast monsoon that began covering
the region and the Gulf of Thailand.
Severe flooding also impacted central Thailand and areas of the Malay Peninsula andnorthern Indonesia about October and early November.

153

Thailand-General

Landslides in Thailand [5]Fig.6 Landslides in Thailand The landslide hazard is one of the major natural disasters in Thailand that has caused
tremendous loss of lives and properties.
 Public awareness was significantly arisen when the severe flooding and landslide
occurred in Kathun district, Nakhon Sithammarat Province, southern Thailand in 1988
where theworst hit was approximately 230 casualties in Ban Kathun Nua.
 Subsequent devastated landslides occurred in Ban Nam Kor and Ban Nam Chun areas
in Petchabun Province.
 In Year 2006, there have been two major landslide events in Uttaradit and in Nan
Provinces, northern Thailand in May and August respectively.
 A nationwide landslide hazard study and mapping project has been studied to determine
landslide potential and affected areas, mitigation plan all over the country.
A large landslide in Thailand [6]Over the last few days torrential rainfall has affected parts of Thailand, causing very
substantial levels of damage. The NASA TRMM satellite has captured some good data on thelocation and extent of this rainfall event.

154

Thailand-GeneralFig.7 A large landslide in Thailand Landslides appear to have been triggered quite extensively.
 The largest seems to have occurred at Ban Ton Harn in Khao Phanom district of Krabi
province, where a large and highly energetic debris flow has destroyed the village.
 The final toll from the landslide is a little unclear, with estimates varying substantially,
but five people have been confirmed as having been killed.

Fig.8 landslide in Thailand

The size of the boulders here is clearly notable; given that the village was directly struckby the event, the death toll seems surprisingly low. A more detailed description of losses

155

Thailand-Generalacross Thailand from this heavy rainfall event is provided in this article, which indicates that
more than 800,000 people have been affected, and 13 killed.
4.2. Social characteristics (prospects of future growth / use,)
Thailand Population Growth [7]Until very recently, the population numbers were growing at a far greater rate, but it’s
claimed that the government-funded family planning program has raised awareness and led toa dramatic fall in birth figures. In 1960, the population growth was at its height with figures ofaround 3.1% but this has fallen to around 0.34% today.
 As countries become more developed, it's natural to see a decline in fertility rates andan increase in its aging population over time. Thailand has gone through this transition
faster than most countries, with the average number of children born to the typical
woman dropping from 6 to 2 in less than twenty years between 1970 and 1990.
 Fertility rates in Thailand are now 30% below replacement level, although this doesn'tmean that Thailand isn't growing. Something known as population momentum, which
results from a fairly high concentration of people of childbearing age, should result inslow natural increases for the next decade.
 Thailand is currently facing two population problems: a quickly aging population andurbanization. Urbanization is mostly concentrated around Bangkok and its surrounding
areas, and many educated Thais are moving abroad while less educated migrants fromneighboring countries like Myanmar and Cambodia move into the country.
Thailand has worked to reduce its fertility rates for nearly 3 years, but it now faces an issue
with a fertility rate that is too low.

Fig.9 Fertility rates

156

Thailand-General

Thailand Population Density

Fig.10 Thailand Population Density is Bangkok 3,625 person/ k𝑚 and Mea Hong Son 19 person/k𝑚

5.

Challenge Thailand is a flood-prone country; because flooding is a regular occurrence and the
population and number of exposed properties continue to grow, losses from this peril
will continue to rise.
 Flooding in this area in 2011 was some of the most severe in modern history; its impact
not only devastated a major city, but propagated through manufacturing supply chainsaround the world.
 Siting a radioactive waste disposal facility refers to the process of selecting a suitablelocation that must take into account technical and other considerations.
 Technical factors cover a long list: geology, hydrogeology, geochemistry, tectonics andseismicity, surface processes, meteorology, human induced events, transportation ofwaste, land use, population distribution, and environmental protection.
 Another key factor today is public acceptance, particularly in industrialized countries
where a locality's "not-in-my-backyard" attitude can hinder the siting of all types ofindustrial waste facilities, not just radioactive waste sites.
 This has caused planners to focus greater attention on societal factors during earlyphases of the siting process.
157

Thailand-General Political factors and public concerns are the most challenge!
References[1] http://www.dmr.go.th/main.php?filename=fault_en, Suwith Kosuwan, Isao Takashima andPunya Charusiri1. Environmental Geology Division, Department of Mineral Resources,
Bangkok , Thailand[2] http://www.cicc.chula.ac.th/eng/2012-04-26-04-23-32/111-likelihood-of-earthquakes-inthailand.html[3] http://www.thaiwater.net/current/2016/drought59/body.html[4] http://www.air-worldwide.com/Blog/Floods-in-Thailand-Are-Regular-Natural-Disasters/[5] http://www.dmr.go.th/main.php?filename=landslide_En[6] https://blogs.agu.org/landslideblog/2011/04/01/large-landslide-in-thailand[7] http://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/thailand-population/

158

Thailand-Specific-Part II. Specific Site Safety Assessment of LLW Repository1.

General Considerations for Safety Assessment.

Due to the management of the radioactive waste in Thailand; however, there is not thedisposal at the present time. Currently, there are a lot of increasing quantities of the radioactive
waste. Consequently, the disposal method is more crucial. As a result, Thailand Institute of
Nuclear Technology (Public Organization), TINT supports for this method; consequently, weneed to have any plans and choose “Near Surface Disposal Method” that we hopefully think
we must finish this process not over 10 years, but we have the siting problem which we mustplan and survey the siting not over 3 years.
Talking about the general considerations for safety assessment, the safety objective will
focus on site, design, construct, operate and close a near surface disposal facilities;
consequently, protection after its closure is optimized social and economic factors being taken
into account. The general consideration for the safety assessment is to equip radiological safety.
In addition, safety assessment is an iterative procedure to evaluate the performance of thedisposal system and its potential influence on human health and the environment. Besides, thepurpose of safety assessment is to equip a rational scientific assurance that disposal system will
equip an adequate level of safety and meet the requirements to protect human health and theenvironment. As previously mentioned must be followed IAEA Safety Standards. Moreover,
we need to concern about the protection of the public and the environmental and nonradiological concerns. Talking about the protection of the public, we prevent and control releasefrom Near Surface facilities and access to the site. Furthermore, a rational assurance must be
equipped that doses and risks to the members of the public that must be controlled by IAEA
Safety Standards. Talking about the environmental and non-radiological concerns, the scope ofsafety requirements for Near Surface Disposal of radioactive waste is the prevention of theenvironment against radiological hazards assorted with the radioactive material in the Near
Surface Disposal facilities that is followed IAEA Safety Standards.
2.

Specific LLW Repository site (planning etc.).

Site characterization is a crucial part of the Near Surface Disposal Facilities that should
start as soon as the site has been identified that we can divide into four stages should beconcerned as the followings:
1.
2.
3.
4.

The conceptual and planning stage;
The area survey stage;
The site investigation stage;
The stage of detailed site characterization leading to site confirmation for the Near
Surface Disposal Facilities.
159

Thailand-SpecificTalking about the site for a Near Surface Disposal facility shall be characterize at a levelof detail sufficient to support a general understanding of both the characteristics at a level ofthe site and how the site will evolve over time.This shall include its present condition,its
probable natural evolution and possible natural events,and also human plans and actions in thevicinity that may affect the safety of the facility over the period of interest. It shall also include
a specific understanding of the impact on safety of features, events and processes associatedwith the site and the facility. Moreover, we need to concern about the geology, hydrogeology,
geochemistry, meteorology, transport of waste, land use, population distribution and protectionof the environment.
3.

Guidelines for Safety Assessment.

The safety assessment of the Near Surface Disposal Facilities should include, among otherthings, the following works: characterization of the main radiation sources (type, shape,
location, properties and geometry of protective materials, etc.); substantiation of the use ofvarious methods and programs for calculating prevention and dispersion; consideration of
postulated initiating events and factors that individually or collectively can affect safety, as wellas analysis and evaluation of sequences of events resulting from postulated initiating events;
modeling of the processes of dispersion (diffusion) of pollutants (emissions, discharges) in theenvironment (air, surface and groundwater, soil), calculation of radiation protection andexposure under normal operation and accidents; and so on. In addition, the safety assessment
is the process of systematically analysing the hazards associated with a disposal facility, andthe capacity of the site and the design of the facility to provide for the completion of safetyfunctions and to meet technical requirements. Safety assessment must include quantification of
the whole level of performance, analysis of the assorted uncertainties, and comparison with therelevant design requirements and safety standards. Safety guides equip comprehensive
guidance on and international best practices for meeting the requirements of disposal facility
the Safety assessment of a disposal facilities need to address the following importantcomponents.
4.

Confidence Building.

In the course of the safety assessment really attention is paid to building the confidence tothe methods and results of the assessment that is a crucial issue; namely: by making
comparative calculations and sensitivity analysis, a feasibility assessment of computer
programs (codes), analytical methods and models is provided; at all stages of the repository's
life cycle, quality assurance programs are developed and implemented; at the request of the
public or the regulatory body, an independent examination of the materials of the safetyassessment can be carried out. Moreover, the confidence must be performed in the safety160Thailand-Specificassessment and its results that is a need to have the confidence in any aspects of the long term
safety of the Near Surface Disposal Facilities to perform the confidence to the satisfaction of
all stakeholders. Talking about the quality assurance that need to apply to the all activities
related to safety, structure, systems and components of the Near Surface Disposal Facilities
that includes all related activities that we must plan site studies, design, construction, operations,various stages for the safety, closure, maintenance of long-term records and institutional control.
Talking about the construction of building, construction and installation of equipment andutilities, and construction of associated support systems. Best practices for construction
techniques should be identified and incorporated into construction procedure. All construction
activities should be performed in a manner that ensures occupational health and safety during
the construction of the facility to protect both workers and the public.

161

VIETNAM

162

Vietnam-General

VIETNAM-Part I. General Outline of LLW Repository1.

General Policy-

Implementing a consistent policy of our Party and State is to use nuclear energy forpeaceful purposes, ensure safety and security, Vietnam has so far participated in most of
the most important international treaties in the nuclear field.

-

In the field of nuclear safety: the Early Notification Convention on nuclear accidents(1987); Convention on Assistance in the event of a nuclear accident or radiation emergency(1987); The Nuclear Safety Convention (2010) and the General Convention on the Safetyof Used Fuel and the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management (2013).

-

In the field of anti-nuclear proliferation: Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (1982);
Agreement between the Government of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam and theInternational Atomic Energy Agency on the application of inspection under the NonProliferation of Nuclear Weapons Agreement (Inspection Agreement) (1989); Southeast
Asia Regional Treaty for non-nuclear weapons (1997); Prohibition Treaty on
Comprehensive Nuclear Weapons Test (2006); signed (2007) and ratified (2012) an
additional Protocol to the Inspection Agreement.

-

In the field of nuclear security, we have joined the Convention on the Protection of Nuclear
Materials and the Revised Part (2012); and undertaking to implement the Code of Conduct
for safety and security of radioactive sources and additional guidance on the import andexport of radioactive sources (2006).
- Vietnam joined the General Convention on the Safety of Used Fuel and the Safety ofRadioactive Waste Management (hereinafter referred to as the General Convention) from
October 2013 and became a member of the Convention from October. 01/2014.
- The General Convention on Used Fuel Safety and Radioactive Waste Safety is amultilateral mechanism with the main goal of establishing and encouraging countries tocommit to the same framework, general and unified legislation on the safe management ofused radioactive waste and nuclear fuel.
Major Policy:- Protection of Human Health and Environment- Environmental Impact Assessment- Radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel in Vietnam will be safely managed to protect
human health and environment now and in the future in a sustainable and cost-effective
manner.

163

Vietnam-General2.

Principles and Safety Assessment

Viet Nam uses the IAEA structures and guidance for its regulation and expectations ofradioactive licencees. One of the main requirements is to justify the use of radioactivity anddemonstrate that the safety of the action to individuals, the community and environment. Safetyassessment is a procedure for evaluating the performance of a Repository and, as a major
objective, its potential radiological impact on human health and the environment.
Radiation and Environmental Protection Principles: For the disposal of radioactive waste
the essential protection goal are: • Long term protection of man and the environment against
hazardous effect of the release of harmful substances from RW packages • Unnecessary
radiation exposure or contamination of man and environment must be avoided • Adequate
safety compliance with the regulatory requirements • Determine guide research anddevelopment priorities • Contribute to confidence of policy makers and scientific community
The protection goals have to be further to be suitable for consideration in the development of
the site selection procedure. In this regard, the safety principles are refereed, to as formulatedby IAEA.
In Viet Nam the dose limit for radiation personnel and the public does prescribed in
Circular No. 19/2012 / TT-BKHCN
3.

Regulatory and Operational System Preparation-

Atomic Energy Law No. 18/2008 / QH12, dated June 3, 2008, effective from January 1,
2009, of the XII National Assembly, 3rd session;
Decree No. 07/2010 / ND-CP dated January 25, 2010 of the Government detailing andguiding the implementation of a number of articles of the Law on Atomic Energy;

-

-

-

Decision No. 115/2007 / QD-TTg dated July 23, 2007 of the Prime Minister on theRegulation to ensure security of radioactive sources.
Decision No. 2376 / QD-TTg dated December 28, 2010 of the Prime Minister approving
the planning for the location of radioactive waste storage and burial till 2030, with a vision
to 2050;
Circular No. 23/2010 / TT-BKHCN of December 29, 2010, guiding the security ofradioactive sources issued by the Ministry of Science and Technology.
Decision No. 450 / QD-TTg dated 25/3/2011 of the Prime Minister approving the Project"Implementation of security assurance measures in the field of atomic energy";
Circular No. 19/2012 / TT-BKHCN of November 8, 2012, of the Ministry of Science andTechnology, providing for the control and assurance of radiation safety in occupational andpublic radiation;
Circular No. 23/2012 / TT-BKHCN dated November 23, 2012 of the Ministry of Science164

Vietnam-General

-

-

-

and Technology guiding the safe transport of radioactive materials.
Joint Circular No. 13/2014 / TTLT-BKHCN-BYT dated June 9, 2014 of the Ministry of
Science and Technology and the Ministry of Health providing regulations on ensuring
radiation safety in health.
Circular No. 22/2014 / TT-BKHCN dated August 25, 2014 of the Ministry of Science andTechnology: Regulations on management of radioactive waste and used radioactive
sources;
Directive No. 17 / CT-TTg dated July 10, 2015 of the Prime Minister on strengthening theassurance of radiation safety and security of radioactive sources;
TCVN 6866-2001 Radiation safety - Dosage limits for radiation workers and the public.
Atomic Energy Law (No.18/2018/QH12);
Circular No.08/2010/TT-BKHCN, date 22/7/2010, Guidance on the declaration, grantingof licenses for conducting radiation work and granting radiation staff certificates;
QCVN 40:2011/BTNMT-National Technical regulation on industrial wastewater;
Other national safety requirements.

Regulatory body










MOST: Under the Article 29 of Ordinance and the Article 34 of Decree 50/CP the MOST
was designated as the Regulatory Authority for Radiation safety and control. MOST is a
Regulatory Body being responsible to Government for the exercise of unified State
management over radiation safety and control throughout the country, responsible fororganizing and directing all radiation safety and control activities within the scope its
function and duties. https://www.most.gov.vn/vn/Pages/Trangchu.aspx
VINATOM: Under direction of the MOST, the VINATOM is responsible for conducting
all R&D activities in the field of the application of nuclear energy in Vietnam and assisting
the VARANS on technical aspects. https://vinatom.gov.vn/
VARANS: Under direction of the MOST, the VARANS is responsible for building oflegislative documents, code of practice, procedures and regulations for radiation andnuclear safety & control; organizing and implementing the notification, registration,
license, renewal, amendment and withdrawal of licenses for radiation and nuclear
establishments,...; conducting regulatory inspections on radiation and nuclear safetyaccording to law. https://www.varans.vn/
VAEA:Vietnam Atomic Energy Agency under MOST, which advise and assist the Ministerto fullill the State management functions for research, use and develope nuclear energy
nationwide carry out professtional activities in the Agency’s management function.
http://vaea.gov.vn/
DOST: The 63 Provincial Departments of Science & Technology (DOSTs) are responsible
for radiation protection and nuclear safety within the province under supervision by
VARANS.
165

Vietnam-General

4.

Site Selection

Site selection is the most complex issue for Radioactive Waste storage or landfill sites.
This is a common problem for many countries around the world. When selecting locations, itis necessary to pay attention to two main areas: social, economic and technical.
Socially: the most difficult issue is community acceptance. The creation of a new location
for a nuclear facility or radiation facility has been an unacceptable problem, sometimes
requiring long-term campaigning by communication, social mobilization and sometimes using
Therefore, the experience of countries often build national storage of used radioactive sourcesin the area allocated by the National Atomic Energy Research Institute of the country. . Typicalexamples in countries around us such as Thailand, Philippines, Malaysia, Indonesia,
Bangladesh...
In terms of economic and technical criteria: Economic issues are closely related to thelocation and its technical characteristics. Sometimes, due to the difficulty of site selection,
people are willing to accept the cost increase to overcome the site's technical limitations.
Technically, if merely choosing a location for building storage, there are not many strict
technical requirements (because often the warehouses are not too large, usually low-risewarehouses (one storey) ), the load is not high ...), If looking for the long term, if looking for alocation for the landfill, consider the following criteria: meteorological, hydrological,
groundwater, geological, ...




5.

In 2003-2004, an State-level Project was carried out, the official
studies on
meteorological, geological and hydrogeological conditions of Vietnam show that on the
territory of Vietnam, the only Coastal Region of South-Central Area might be considered
as relevant and the most suitable region for construction of the future national near surface
disposal facility of low and intermediate levels Radwaste.
There are 3 most suitable candidate sites: Tu Thien village, Son Hai village, Ninh Phuoc
district and Thai An village, Ninh Hai district, Ninh Thuan Province. They are near the site
for building of the first nuclear power plant.
Design and Construction of Disposal Facilities Design, construction, operation, closure, post-closure phase Quality assurance
The operator of a disposal facility is responsible for all necessary activities for design,
construction, operation and closure, in compliance with the regulatory requirements andwithin national legal infrastructure. The operator is responsible for developing and fordemonstrating its safety, consistent with the requirements of the regulatory body. The
facility and its engineered barriers need to be designed to provide safety during the166Vietnam-General

operational period. The construction activities have to be carried out in such a way toensure safety during the operational period.
The design is performed to satisfy the following requirements:
-

o
o
+
+
+
+
o

o
o

Sufficient capacity to store the amount of forecast resources according to demand
Ensuring economy, not too wasteful.
The design ensures the dose limit for radiation personnel and the public does notexceed the dose limit as prescribed in Circular No. 19/2012 / TT-BKHCN,
specifically:o Limit the dose for radiation workers: 20 mSv / year.
Limit the dose to the public: 1 mSv / year.
Radioactive sources before being stored in the warehouse are placed in containers toensure the dose rate on the outside of containers (within 100 cm) is smaller:
50 µSv / h, for gamma source security group A
10 µSv / h, for gamma sources of security groups B and C
10 µSv / h, for gamma D security source, Alpha / Beta source
10 µSv / h, for neutron source.
The source warehouse is divided into separate compartments according to: security
level of radioactive sources, major radiation type of radioactive sources, long half-life(> = 30 years) or short.
The dose rate on each compartment after closing the lid is less than 10 µSv/h.
The dose rate outside the source warehouse is less than 0.5 µSv / h.

167

RECENT ACTIVITIES2019 Workshop• Date: 1st – 3rd October 2019
• Host: Vietnam Atomic Energy Institute (VINATOM)2018 Workshop• Date: 17th – 19th October 2018
• Host: Australian Nuclear Science & Technology Organisation (ANSTO)

2017 Workshop• Date: 1st – 3rd August 2017
• Host: Thailand Institute of Nuclear Technology (TINT)

168

CONTRIBUTORSAUSTRALIAMr Duncan Kemp
Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO)
Ms Lynn Tan
Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO)BANGLADESH
Dr M. Moinul Islam
Bangladesh Atomic Energy Commission (BAEC)CHINAProf Hongxiang An
China Institute for Radiation Protection (CIRP)
Mr Qin Guoqiang
China National Nuclear Corporation (CNNC)
INDONESIAMr Sucipta
National Nuclear Energy Agency (BATAN)
Dr Dadong Iskandar
National Nuclear Energy Agency (BATAN)
JAPAN
Prof Kosako Toshiso
The University of Tokyo
Mr Saito Tatsuo
Japan Atomic Energy Agency (JAEA)Dr Tani Kotaro
National Institutes for Quantum and Radiological Science and Technology (QST)
Dr Ogino Haruyuki
Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry (CRIEPI)169

KAZAKHSTAN
Mr Yevgeniy Tur
National Nuclear Center of the Republic of Kazakhstan
MALAYSIADr Norasalwa Binti Zakaria
Malaysia Nuclear Agency
MONGOLIA
Ms Uranchimeg Batdelger
Nuclear Energy Commission, Government of Mongolia
PHILIPPINES
Ms Kristine Marie Dacallo Romallosa
Philippine Nuclear Research Institute (PNRI)THAILAND
Ms Nanthavan Ya-anantThailand Institute of Nuclear Technology (TINT)
Mr Witsanu Katekaew
Thailand Institute of Nuclear Technology (TINT)
VIETNAM
Assoc. Prof. Dr Le Thi Mai Huong
Institute for Technology of Radioactive & Rare Elements (ITRRE)EDITOR
Ms Tanida Ayako
International Affairs & Research Department
Nuclear Safety Research Association (NSRA)

170

Sponsored by Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT)
Published by Nuclear Safety Research Association (NSRA)
Secretariat:
Nuclear Safety Research Association (NSRA)
5-18-7, Shimbashi, Minato-ku, Tokyo, Japan
Tel: +81-3-5470-1983 Fax: +81-3-5470-1991

171
Email: fnca@fnca.mext.go.jp