Issues of the High-Level Radioactive Waste in Japan

Prof. Dr. Kenji YAMAJI

Director-General, Research Institute of Innovative Technology for the Earth (RITE)International Symposium onNuclear Back-end Issues and the Role of Nuclear Transmutation Technology
after the accident of TEPCO’s Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Stations

KUR Research Program for Scientific Basis of Nuclear Safety
Kyoto University Research Reactor InstituteNovember 28, 2013
@The Shiran Hall, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan.

1Process for Energy/Environment Policy Making in Japan
Political Power Shift from LDP to DP in Sept. 2009

LDP (Liberal Democratic Party);DP (Democratic Party)

Too ambitious Climate Target for 2020 (25% reduction from 1990) in 2009
Energy and Environment Council (ministerial members, political)
Fukushima Accident in 2011
Full scope FIT implemented in 2012
National Debates (incl. deliberative poll)
Start of Power System Reform (continuing)
Innovative Strategy for Energy and the Environment in 2012
(Zero Nuclear by the end of 2030s)
Ordinary Administrative Process

Advisory Committee for Energy andNatural Resources (METI)
Atomic Energy Commission (CAO)
Central Environmental Council (ME)
Industry Structure Council (METI)

Strategic Energy Plan
Long-term Nuclear PlanBasic Environmental Plan
Climate Change Policy

Cabinet Decision
Building a responsible energy policy: zero-based review of the Innovative Strategy for
Energy and Environment; reconstruct Strategic Energy Plan by the end of 2013
(Keep Nuclear Option)

Political Power Shift from DP to LDP in Dec. 2012

Re-examination of climate change policy: zero-based review of the 25% reduction target by
COP19: minus 3.8% from 2005 (3.1% increase from 1990)
2

Evolution of HLW Disposal Program in Japan
R&D

Second Progress
Report (H12)(TechnicalReliability)

First Progress
Report (H 3)(Technical Feasibility)Start of R&D
Program

2040
2030
2020
2010
2005

Selection of Disposal Site

2002
2000

Amendment of “Final Disposal Act”,and Regulation Laws (June 2007)

1992

1976
“Specified Radioactive Waste
Final Disposal Act” (June2000)

Repository
Operation

Commencement of Open Solicitation(Dec. 2002)

NSC: “Requirements of Geological Environment
to Select PIAs of HLW Disposal” (Sep. 2002)

Establishment of NUMO (Oct. 2000)

NSC: Nuclear Safety Commission of Japan

Implementation
3

Legislation of Specific Radioactive
Waste Final Disposal Act (June 2000)
AEC’s Special Panel on
Disposal of High-Level
Radioactive Waste

JNC’s Second Progress
Report (H12 Report)(May 1996 – May 1998)

Demonstrated technical reliabilityof HLW geological disposal in Japan
based on the results of R&D since1976
Reviewed by AEC’s special
committee and OECD/NEA24 open symposia in various cities
Report distributed to 2750 public
libraries throughout the countryPanel members from broadareas32 panel / subpanel meetings
6 public hearingsFormulated a fundamental
scheme for implementation ofHLW disposal- Site selection process- Implementation body
- Fund collection system- Stakeholder’s confidence- Community partnership(November 1999)

Legislation of SpecificRadioactive Waste Final
Disposal Act (June 2000)

4

Specified Radioactive Waste
Final Disposal Act(enacted in June 2000, amended in June 2007)• Definition of specified waste• Basic policy, basic and implementing plans
for final disposal• Funding system• Disposal site selection process• Provisions for disposal and repository
closure• Implementing entity• Fund management entity• ……….
55

Final Disposal Act (enacted June 2000, amended June 2007)
 As prescribed in the Final Disposal Act, NUMO has missions as theimplementer of the geological disposal project.
 An amendment to the Act in 2007 added the implementation of geologicaldisposal of some TRU waste.

Major prescriptions in the Final DisposalAct
 Definition of specified waste Basic policy, basic and implementing
plans for final disposal
 Funding system
 Disposal site selection process Provisions for disposal and repository
closure Implementing entity
 Fund management entity

NUMO’s Missions as implementing entity
 NUMO is responsible for disposing of HLWand TRU waste (wastes from thereprocessing of spent nuclear fuel) in thedeep geological formation.

• Site selection(*) and characterization• Design, licensing,construction,operation and closure of repository• Public relations• Collection of fund(*) The site selection approach consists ofthree stages: 1) Literature Survey, 2)
Preliminary Investigation, 3) Detailed
6
Investigation.

Organizations and Rolesin the HLW Disposal Program
Owner of power plants

Utilities, JAEA Definition

METI
Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industryof funding
condition

Waste
fund

Submission andapproval ofimplementation
planNUMO

Nuclear Waste Management
Organization of Japan

 Basic policy Final disposal planSupervision
Consignmentof fundmanagement

RWMC
Radioactive Waste
Management, Fundingand Research Center Collection of fund
 Fund management
Extraction
 Site selection and characterizationof fund Design, licensing, construction,
R&D Organizations
operation and closure of repository
R&D and(JAEA, CRIEPI etc.)
 Public relations
technical
 R&D and URL Projects
support7

HLW disposal concept in Japan(Multi-barrier concept)

Hostrock

Deep undergroundlocation(deeper than 300 m)
 Isolation from surface
perturbations
 Low water flow rate Reducing environment

Natural Barrier

Buffer(bentonite + sand) Mechanical buffer Low permeability
hydraulic barrier
 Retardation ofradionuclide
migration

Overpack Vitrified HLWcanister(carbon steel) Containment
for more than
1,000 years

 Extremely
lowsolubility

Engineered Barrier System (EBS)88

Typical repository layout
Disposal panelfor HLW(HLW/TRU co-location option)

Disposal panel
for TRU waste

Access tunnel
Pit disposal

Tunnel disposal

TRU waste

Hardrock

HLW
Softrock

Emplacement ofwaste packages
9Three Stages of Site Selection Process
Detailed
Investigation
Areas (DIAs)

Preliminary(*) This route was added
Investigation
after Toyo town case (2007) Areas (PIAs)

Repository
Site (RS)Municipalities
invited by theGovernment (*)

Volunteermunicipalities

Literature
surveySelection
criteria

1ststage

Detailed
Investigation

Preliminary
Investigation- Excavation of testtunnel- Investigation in
the test tunnel- Geophysical survey- Borehole drilling etc.

Selection
criteria

2nd

Selection stageof PIAs

Selection
criteria

Late 2020s

Selectionof DIAs

3rdstage

Selectionof RS

Government’s hearings from governor and mayor

10Siting procedure (1st stage)NUMO’s open solicitation

Government’s invitation

Application by municipality

Acceptance by municipality

Literature survey by NUMO
NUMO’s report on selection of PIAs

1ststage

Report for public review
Open forum
Compilation of public
opinionConformity withselection criteria

Similar process
is repeated inthe 2nd and 3rdstages

noyes

Abort
sitingGovernment’s hearings
from mayor and governor
Opinions frommayor and governor

affirmative
Government’s approval
for selection of PIAs

procedure

negative

2nd stage
Preliminary
investigationby NUMO
11Excerpt from “Basic policies on the final disposal of specificradioactive waste”(METI Order 591, amended 2008-3-14)

 Pursue the programme while gaining understanding and support
from the electricity consumers who receive the benefit of nuclear
power generation, in addition to local residents concerned with thesiting process.
 The government, the implementer, reactor owners and other relevant
research institutions ensure transparency through thoroughinformation disclosure with mutual cooperation.
 The government, together with the implementer and utilities,
proactively engage in outreach activities for the public to gain
knowledge and to raise the awareness of energy issue, the benefitof nuclear energy, and the importance and safety of the finaldisposal, through diverse PR media.
 The government, utilities and the implementer perform each dutywith proper role sharing and mutual cooperation, for sufficiently
providing regional support to the communities concerned with thefinal disposal project.
 The government and the implementer clarify the costs required forthe final disposal project and the subsidy program for fostering
public understanding.
1212

Six Proposals in a Reply of Science Council of Japan (SCJ)
to Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) Sept. 11, 2012*
1) Fundamental reconsideration of policies related to disposal ofhigh-level radioactive waste (HLW**);
2) Awareness of the limits of scientific and technical abilities andsecuring scientific autonomy;3) Rebuilding a policy framework centered on temporal safe storageand management of the total amount of HLW;
4) Necessity of persuasive policy decision procedures for fairness ofburdens;
5) Necessity of multiple-stage consensus formation by establishing
opportunities for debate; and6) Awareness that long-term persistent undertakings are necessaryfor problem resolution.
* In September 2010, the Science Council of Japan (SCJ) received a deliberation request from the Japan Atomic
Energy Commission (AEC), and SCJ formed a Review Committee for Disposal of High-Level Radioactive Waste. The
Review Committee made a Reply on Disposal of High-Level Radioactive Waste in September 2012
HLW** : Vitrified HLW and/or Spent Nuclear Fuel in the Reply of SCJ to AEC

13

Setting a Moratorium Period of “Temporal Safe Storage”
The temporal safe storage is characterized by securing a moratorium period ofseveral dozen or several hundred years in order to establish appropriate
handling measures for problems.
It provides the advantages of using this period to refine technologicaldevelopments and scientific knowledge and guaranteeing the possibility ofcreating handling measures that target a longer period.
For example, improvement of the durability of containers, development of
nuclear transmutation technology to reduce volume and toxicity of HLW, andresearch related to the stability of geological layers ,In addition, the temporal safe storage makes it possible to keep various options
for future generation to choose for final disposal of HLW.

14

“Management of the Total Amount” of HLW
Management of the total amount has two connotations:“Setting an upper limit for the total amount”
and/or“Controlling increases of the total amount”“Setting an upper limit for the total amount” corresponds to the withdrawal
from nuclear power; setting upper limits in accordance with the tempo of thatwithdrawal.
“Controlling increases of the total amount” corresponds to keeping nuclear
power in future with strictly controlling increases of the total amount, and theamount of waste per unit of generated power must be controlled to thesmallest amount possible.

To respond to the concerns on the limitless increase of HLW
15

Current Status of HLW and Challenges
Current Status:

1,984 HLW canisters (vitrified wastes) (1,734 (1,442 from France/UK and 295 from test
operation of Rokkasho) at Rokkasho and 247 at Tokai) + 770 HLW canisters (vitrified wastes)
will be sent back from UK
Highly radioactive liquid waste of 406 m3 (corresponds to 630 HLW canisters) at Tokai

Some 17,000 ton Spent Nuclear Fuels (14,000 ton at reactor sites + 3,000 ton at Rokkashoreprocessing plant) : corresponds to some 21,000 HLW canisters (vitrified wastes) if
reprocessed (1.25HLW canisters/ton of spent fuel)Challenges:
・Nuclear Future in Japan must be decided
・Reconstruction of HLW disposal strategy (required in any nuclear future scenarios)- Securing temporal safe storage (of HLW and/or spent fuel) in any way,
- Reappraisal of the safety of geological disposal,- Total amount management (less volume, less toxicity)
・Siting of HLW disposal (required independent from the choice of nuclear future)
16