2018 – No. 35.2

NEA News

In this issue:
The Cabri Reactor: Equipped for NEA Cabri International
Project tests
TREAT: A new element in the international nuclear science
infrastructure
The NEA inspiring female leaders in science and engineering
Metadata for radioactive waste management
and more...

NEA News
Volume No. 35.2

2018

Contents
Facts and opinions
The Cabri Reactor: Equipped for NEA Cabri International Project tests ������������������������������������������ 6
TREAT: A new element in the international nuclear science infrastructure ���������������������������������� 10

NEA updates
The NEA inspiring female leaders in science and engineering ���������������������������������������������������������������� 11
Metadata for radioactive waste management ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 15

News briefs
A strategic partnership between the NEA and China ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 18
International Nuclear Law Essentials in Singapore �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 19
The NEA thanks outgoing NRA Chairman Dr Shunichi Tanaka ���������������������������������������������������������������� 20
NEA Joint Projects ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 21

New publications���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 27

OECD Boulogne building.

1

Abu Dhabi towers.
Shutterstock, Anastasiia Vasylyk

EDITORIAL – OCTOBER 2017 SPEECH

Director-General William D. Magwood, IV

IAEA, Dean Calma

Speech at the International Ministerial
Conference on Nuclear Power in the 21st Century1

Mr William D. Magwood, IV, NEA Director-General delivering his opening remarks at the International Ministerial Conference on
Nuclear Power in the 21st Century. St Regis Saadiyat Island Resort, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, 30 October 2017.

As we gather here today, we begin several days of
discussion about the role of nuclear energy in this still
very new century. In contrast to past discussions about thissubject, the outlook for the future of nuclear power must be
made in technical, policy and economic environments thatare extraordinarily unclear.

The world came together in Paris at the end of 2015 to
set itself on a path towards a low-carbon future, but two
years later, the path remains uncertain. Many countries havemade broad political decisions to reduce carbon emissions,but few have made substantive steps towards realising thisvision. Despite ambitious words, some have made steps in
the opposite direction, presenting an easy political message
rather than a substantive strategy to implement a true
low‑carbon economy.
This is not new. Energy has always been a political matter.
The history of the region in which we convene today has
been shaped, in part, by energy politics since before the turnof the previous century.
In OECD economies, a powerful and resilient system ofelectricity generation and distribution has been constructedthat has successfully fostered industrial expansion and anenhanced quality of life and health. This system serves as
the framework on which future plans may be crafted and it
gives us the ability to experiment, to test new approaches
and even to make mistakes.
But this framework is, today, under vastly increased
pressure. It is being asked to do what it is ill-equipped to
do and it is suffering from a lack of investment in needed
infrastructure. The electricity markets themselves are in astate in which zero or negative pricing is commonplace, andthe companies that built the successful systems upon which
everyday life depends face financial unviability.
Baseload plants, which today supply nearly all of ourelectricity, are being shut down. In some places, evenhydroelectric plants, which are second only to nuclear power
as the source of zero-carbon energy in OECD countries, areoperating at a loss. In many markets, the only electric supply
that can be built is that which is subsidised by governments.
Some consider this to be an energy transition. Others worry
that we are witnessing the erosion of an infrastructure thatpowered economic development for many decades and,perhaps, an opening of a door to economic decline.

1.	 Mr Magwood’s remarks followed those of Mr Yukiya Amano, Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

3

Whichever side of this debate is correct, the reality today
is that many electricity markets are dysfunctional, emissions
are not falling rapidly enough to meet global targets anduncertainty about the future of energy is higher than it has
ever been.
Whatever picture emerges for the future energy portfolio
for the world, it will need to adapt to what may be a vast new
wave of electrification, with electricity poised to displacepetroleum in many transportation applications.
The future energy portfolio must also reflect theaspirations of the 1.2 billion people in the world today whoare currently without access to electricity and the 2.7 billion
people who lack clean cooking facilities. It will also need torespond to 6.5 million premature deaths that today occur
each year due to air pollution.
These challenges are likely to grow – not shrink – as
the global population grows from 7.5 billion today to about
10 billion by 2050.
So what will the energy framework look like in the future?
There are many projections and scenarios, many plans andintentions. But the reality is no one knows.
There is no reason to believe that the analysts andprognosticators of today have any better foresight than thoseof the last ten, twenty or thirty years. And their records are
dismal.
I am often asked about the future of nuclear energy inthe world. On the one hand, the answer is quite clear. New
nuclear plants are, today, being built all around the world.
Roughly 60 nuclear reactors are under construction aroundthe world as we speak – including four units, 300 kilometres
west of this hall. Dozens more are in the planning stages. If
these projects and plans proceed, all of those reactors arelikely to be in operation in 2050, alongside the many plants
already producing electricity today.
It is true, however, that the regional distribution of nuclear
power plants may become very uneven. To some degree,that simply reflects the particular preferences of individual
countries, with their individual circumstances taken into
account.
But the fact that nuclear plants are being built in someparts of the world and shut down in others also reflects
market dysfunction and policies that heavily subsidise
renewables and suppress nuclear energy. And it reflects
the failure of many traditional suppliers to deliver on theirpromises to build a new generation of plants on scheduleand within set budgets.

The outcome will rely on advancements in transmission
and distribution, energy storage and other technologies. But
it is clear that the higher the proportion of variable sources,
the greater the grid stability challenge. For a country with
75% variable renewables, a capacity equivalent to about 25%
of demand must be able to be ramped up and down within
an hour to maintain a stable supply.
To the degree that natural gas thermal plants remain, as
they are today, as the backup supply to enable increased useof variable resources, the objective stated by many countries
to reduce carbon emissions by 80% or more by 2050 will
be elusive.
Professor James Hansen was the scientist who firstraised broad awareness of climate change when he testified
before the US Congress in 1988. Originally highly regarded
as an expert studying the atmosphere of Venus, he becameaware of parallels between that hot planet and trends on the
Earth. Dr Hansen concluded that carbon in our atmosphere
was impacting weather and warming the planet. He remains
one of the leading voices in the world advocating aggressive
action to reduce carbon emissions.
Dr Hansen has said, starkly, that “renewables plus natural
gas equals planetary doom.”
I imagine there are many people who will listen intently to
Dr Hansen when he speaks of the threat of climate change,
but fall suddenly deaf when he highlights the folly of anelectricity system that is fronted by wind turbines but backed
by constantly spinning gas turbines and quietly restarted coalplants.
This is particularly true where nuclear is substituted by amix of renewables and natural gas – experience demonstrates
consistently that carbon emissions rise.
The need to plan for and implement an advanced energy
system that will support our future needs, desires andrealities is too important to continue listening selectively.
We must have our ears and our eyes open and our efforts
set to give future generations the greatest benefit previous
generations bestowed to us: choices.
With so much uncertainty about the future, the world
will need as many tools as possible at its disposal. Nuclear
energy is one of the options in the global toolbox to address
climate change, air pollution and energy security.

Nevertheless, whatever the reasons, each country shouldbe free to take its own energy path.

Whether renewables ultimately comprise 40% of our
future electric supply or 75%, something else will need toprovide the other 25% to 60%; and that something else mustbe fully dispatchable – available when renewables are not;available when the winters are long and cold; available when
the summers are unbearably hot and the wind is still.

For some countries, the emphasis today is on renewableenergy. This is a reasonable and rational path, particularly
as the cost of wind and solar energy drop. We should use
these resources and in some circumstances – such as indeveloping countries that lack extensive infrastructure –renewables should be the energy resource of choice.

Far from being a conflicting choice with renewables,
nuclear generation could be an enabler for large scale
renewable deployment. The complementarity between the
two technologies may mitigate risks related to renewableintermittence, contributing to a decarbonised and moresecure electricity system.

The question that must be answered, particularly by OECD
countries with their vast, well-functioning electric supply
frameworks, is to what degree variable renewable energy
resources can practically be applied. Many authoritative
studies and projections exist and the conclusions vary; some,such as a 2015 analysis assembled by France’s EDF, indicatethat 40% variable renewables is an optimum target. Others,
such as the International Energy Agency, think 75% could
be achievable.

If we are truly to reach this advanced energy system of
the future, three things will be needed.

4 | NEA News 2018 – No. 35.2

First, we must address the dysfunction in our electricity
markets. Requirements for utilities to use subsidised
renewables, which have zero marginal cost but enjoy
guaranteed remuneration, have dramatically depressed
wholesale prices and drained electric utilities of the resourcesthat will be needed to build the systems of the future in many
OECD countries.

Abu Dhabi was host to
the International Ministerial
Conference on Nuclear Powerin the 21st Century(October 2017).
Shutterstock, Leonid Andronov

In today’s power markets, no technology, not a single
one – renewables included – is able to finance itself on thebasis of market prices. This is simply not sustainable, unlessgovernments plan to essentially nationalise their electric
systems and use taxpayer resources indefinitely to support
these policies, irrespective of cost.
NEA analysis demonstrates that a better path would beto redesign markets to incentivise the use of low‑carbon
energy technologies and to allocate system costs – such astransmission access – fairly to those technologies that create
them. We should also create pricing systems that reflect therealities of high-fixed cost, low-carbon technologies, which
concerns both nuclear and renewables. In order to ensuresufficient investment, we must create long-term financing
mechanisms that ensure stable returns over the lifetime of
the wind farm, nuclear plant or other installation. Finally, we
should remunerate dispatchable capacity for the service thatit provides to the system by being ready to satisfy demandat any time.
Second, we need to reinvigorate research and innovation
on a broad front. We benefit today from the broad andforward-looking research programmes of the past. By notcontinuing to plant seeds that can grow over the long-term,
we risk starving the generations that will follow us.
For nuclear energy to play a larger role in our future energy
system, we should explore innovations to make nuclear
plants more flexible and cost-efficient while achieving highlevels of nuclear safety. We should explore Generation IV
technologies and advanced, proliferation-resistant fuelcycles. We should undertake a major new global initiative todevelop the materials of the 22nd century today.
Because we truly do not know what energy resources
and technologies will be needed or available over the coming
decades, we owe it to the future to maintain a broad front ofresearch, development and innovation. Given the long-term
nature of energy research and infrastructure development,

the choices we make today will weigh heavily on the abilityof the next generation to respond to the challenges of 2050.
Finally, we need to bring our policies in line with ourdesires. In 2015, the OECD, the Nuclear Energy Agency, theInternational Energy Agency and the International Transport
Forum reported to an OECD Ministerial Council Meeting
regarding how to better align policies across different
areas for a successful economic transition of all countries
to sustainable low-carbon economies. The report, Aligning
Policies for a Low-carbon Economy, found that across a broad
range of policies covering everything from agriculture toenergy, despite the positive words from most governments
about reducing carbon emissions, their policies were moving
in the wrong direction.
If we are serious about reducing carbon emissions,
we must make that our priority, not the promotion of thetechnologies that provide nice photo opportunities but leadto higher emissions.
We at the NEA work with our member countries andothers around the world to provide the analysis needed tochart our next steps. Programmes and initiatives such as
Nuclear Innovation 2050, which can bring regulators into thediscussion about future innovations, and the forward-looking
Generation IV International Forum, bring countries together
to explore the technologies of the future. We will do thesethings and more.
But in the end, the governments of the world must rise toreal challenges of the future and follow the example of ourforbearers who looked beyond the easy answers of today
and addressed the hard tasks of tomorrow. The forbearers
who built the great electric systems that brought light to thedarkness in the 20 th century. The forbearers who harnessed
the atom and took humankind’s first steps into space. And
the forbearers who built a great global city in the Arabiandesert.
Thank you.

William D. Magwood, IV,
NEA Director-General5

FACTS AND OPINIONSThe Cabri Reactor: Equipped for
NEA Cabri International Project tests
by F. Barré, C. Manenc and M. Kissane
Mr François Barré (francois.barre@irsn.fr) is Safety Research Deputy Director, IRSN, Ms Christelle Manenc (christelle.manenc@irsn.fr)
is Project Leader of the Cabri Experimental Programme, IRSN, and Dr Martin Kissane (martin.kissane@oecd.org) is Nuclear Safety
Analyst in the NEA Division of Nuclear Safety Technology and Regulation.

Introduction
The objective of the Cabri International Project (CIP) is to
study the behaviour of nuclear fuel rods and their cladding
during a reactivity injection accident (RIA) in a pressurised
water reactor (PWR). The project was launched in the year
2000 by the French Institute for Radiation Protection and
Nuclear Safety (IRSN) and includes refurbishment of the Cabri
reactor, upgrading work vis-à-vis regulations, implementationof a water loop, development of experimental devices andthe carrying out of twelve RIA tests.
The Cabri reactor has been undergoing a major
refurbishment over the past ten years, and is now equippedwith a new configuration that will enable CIP to study the
behaviour of advanced fuels in more fully representative
PWR accident conditions.

The Cabri reactor
The Cabri experimental reactor is located in the south ofFrance in Cadarache, and is owned and operated by the
French Alternative Energies and Atomic Energy Commission(CEA). The IRSN has been given priority to use the reactor
by government decree for its research programme on fuelsafety. It is therefore funding the Cabri refurbishment, thereactor operation and all the experimental work in order tocomplete the CIP tests.
The Cabri facility is a pool-type research reactor dedicatedto studying reactor-initiated accidents or RIAs on a section ofhighly irradiated fuel in a water-cooled reactor. The possibilityof such an accident under real circumstances would depend
largely on the reactor technology, but an accident could also
arise after the ejection of a control rod, and would result ina rapid, sudden and local increase in the neutron flux, which
would induce an increase in nuclear power as a result offission. The Cabri facility reproduces these representative
conditions of accident scenarios. Power transients are
obtained by depressurising the neutron absorbing element,
helium-3 (3He) in the core. The nominal power of the reactor
is 10 MW – designed to carry out power transients with apulse width between 10 and 100 ms, a maximum power ofmore than 20 GW and an injected energy of up to 200 MJ.

6 | NEA News 2018 – No. 35.2

Going critical for the very first time in 1964, the Cabri
reactor was originally intended for tests to study reactivity
accidents that had been taken into account in the safety
analysis of certain research reactors. In 1977-1978, thereactor was reconverted, meaning that the core was changed
and the facility equipped with a loop reproducing theoperating conditions of a sodium-cooled fast reactor. From1978 to 2001, safety tests for the Phénix and Superphénix
fast reactors were performed, followed by sodium loop
studies of reactivity accidents in PWRs (i.e. the PWR-Na
programme, from 1993 to 2000).
Following changes in the conditions for using fuelin reactors, and to supplement the previous PWR-Na
programme, in 2000 the IRSN launched the Cabri International
Project under the auspices of the Nuclear Energy Agency.
The project consists of tests that study the behaviour of PWR
fuel rods in the Cabri facility during a reactivity accident whensuch fuel rods are in conditions identical to those of reactor
conditions (i.e. temperature, pressure and water flow).
Before being able to perform the CIP tests, however, it
was necessary to refurbish the Cabri reactor and to adapt it
to PWR conditions. This refurbishment – whereby a waterloop was implemented in the place of the sodium loop – wascompleted in 2015.

Refurbishment and upgrading work
The refurbishment of the reactor was performed by the CEA
during the 2003-2015 period, and it included a large numberof delicate tasks, such as:• seismic reinforcement of the building and core pool (seeFigure 1: the red colours show the reinforced part of
the reactor);• replacement of the core envelope;• refurbishment of the ventilation system;• design and implementation of a new waste
management system;• renovation of the glove boxes of the primary circuit;• design, manufacturing and implementation of the newexperimental water loop to replace the sodium loop.

Figure 1: Overview of the refurbishment tasks
Design and production of a new handlingand transportation cask

Inspection and repairof the primary circuit

Design, manufacturing andimplementation of the newexperimental loop

Refurbishmentof the ventilation system

Seismic reinforcementof the building and core pool
Replacement of the coreenvelope
Design and implementation ofa new waste management system

The refurbishment of the reactor has led to a fully renewed
experimental reactor. With authorisation from the French
Safety Authority (ASN) in 2015, the first criticality of the Cabri
reactor occurred in the new, post-renovation configuration on
20 October 2015.

efficiency of the six control rods, the transient rod reactivity
worth, the kinetic parameters (delayed-neutron fraction
and prompt-neutron lifetime) and the reactivity effects(experimental cell configuration, core stacking effect andisothermal temperature coefficient).

The commissioning tests

High power tests (see Figure 2) were performed at theend of 2016, primarily for the calibration of experimental
neutronic chambers by thermal balance on the core’s water
circuit.

Qualification tests for the pressurised water loop were
performed to assess operation at nominal PWR conditions(155 bar, 280°C, 1.5 M 3h -1). The 3He transient rod system
was qualified to assess the depressurisation kinetics and thetime control system.
Performed between October 2015 and June 2016,
low core power tests (<100 kW) were used for neutron
characterisation of the reactor core, in particular the integral

In the first half of 2017, 66 transient power tests were
performed under conditions similar to those of future
experimental tests. The main objectives of these tests
were to qualify the whole facility (transient rods, primarycircuit, water loop, experimental measurements and dataacquisition), to check the absence of impacts of the water

Figure 2: Photos looking down into the reactor pool showing the Cherenkov radiation
characteristic of the different core powers

100 kW

2 MW

7 MW

14 MW

23 MW

7

Figure 3: Example of a power transientStart up: simple depressurisation – 3He pressure: 11.5 bar maximum characteristics obtained
100 000

250

10 000Power (MW)

1 000
150

Power: ~21 GW
100

100
10

Energy deposited (MJ)

200
Energy: 235 MJ

50

1

0

0
0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

Time (s)Maximal Power (20.5 GW)

Maximal energy injected

Figure 4: The Cabri hodoscope

Figure 5: Test device
Start up: simple depressurisation – 3He pressure: 11.5 bar maximum characteristics obtained
PW flow in pile
cell inlet
Channel flow

8 | NEA News 2018 – No. 35.2

Bypass flow

Channel tube

Test rodloop conditions on the transient and to assess the reactivity
injection system (reproducibility, settings and 3He purity). The
maximum test powers were between 203 MW and 21 GW,
with an injected energy between 21 MJ and 235 MJ.

called a hodoscope (see Figure 4), which is designed tomeasure fuel movement during the power transient. The
Cabri facility is equipped with non-destructive testing
capacities, namely gamma scanning and X-ray tomography.

By mid-2017, all commissioning tests were performed,
and the CEA submitted its application to the French Nuclear
Safety Authority (ASN) with the goal of launching the CIP
experimental phase.

Placed under the aegis of the NEA, the project is
co-ordinated and co-funded by the IRSN, with multiple Frenchand international partners supporting the project from twelve
different countries – the Czech Republic, Finland, France,
Germany, Japan, Korea, the Slovak Republic, Spain, Sweden,
Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the United States.

The CIPThe experimental project is directed by the IRSN, which also
develops and makes use of its own experimental devices andinstrumentation. It consists of exposing sections of irradiatedfuel rods under the thermos-hydraulic and neutronic power
conditions encountered during an RIA. Power transientsare simulated through the depressurisation of 3 He within
the Cabri reactor core. The rod being tested is positioned
inside the centre of the Cabri reactor core’s test device(see Figure 5).
The test device containing the fuel rod is equipped witha considerable range of instrumentation, making it possible
to measure the main experimental parameters: flows,pressures, temperatures, axial displacement of the cladding,etc. The water loop is equipped with a gamma spectrometry
unit, used to characterise fission-product release in case of
cladding failure. The reactor is fitted with a specific device

Among the twelve tests to be carried out in total, thefirst two reactivity injection tests on irradiated rods werecarried out in 2001 and 2002 in the Cabri reactor equippedwith the sodium loop (i.e. before the refurbishment phaseand the implementation of the water loop). These two tests
made it possible to study phenomena that do not dependon the nature of the coolant. In order to study conditions
representative of an accident in a PWR, the sodium loop
nonetheless had to be replaced by a pressurised water loop.
The ten remaining tests in the water loop are now being
planned to start in 2018. Table 1 provides the text matrix,
which was prepared by the project’s International TechnicalAdvisory Group and validated by the International Steering
Committee.
With the first test in the water loop imminent, the IRSN
would like to acknowledge all CIP partners for their continued
support during this major refurbishment of the Cabri facility.

Table 1: The current test matrix for the ten remaining CIP tests
TEST ROD
N°

TEST

1

OBJECTIVE

FuelBurn-up(GWd/t)Cladding

Boiling crisis

CIPQ

MOX

47

Zy-4

X

2

CIP1-2

UO2

77

M5

X

3

CIP3-1R

UO2

75

Zirlo

4
5

CIP4-1P
CIP4-1P-HP

MOX-P
MOX-P

65
65

M5
M5

6

CIP4-2

MOX-SBR

65

Zy-4

7

CIP3-3

UO2

> 55

8
9
10

CIPX
CIPY
CIPZ

UO2

Optimised
Zirlo
M-MDA

Post failure
event

More
Loop qualification

X
X
X
X
X

In Na loop
X
(Rep Na 6)
X(CIP02)X(CIP01)µ structure influenceof MOX fuel effectof filling pressure
90b vs 50B
in others tests
New cladding
material

To be defined
To be definedNote
1.	 Reactivity injection accidents, often called reactivity accidents or reactivity-initiated accidents (RIAs), are generally taken into
account in the reactor design. For PWRs, they result from the failure of a mechanism controlling a control rod assembly, whichhelps to regulate the nuclear reaction. Reactivity accidents lead to a rapid, violent generation of energy in the fuel.

9

FACTS AND OPINIONSTREAT: A new element in
the international nuclear science
infrastructure
by J. Dyrda
Dr James Dyrda (james.dyrda@oecd.org) is Nuclear Scientist in the NEA Division of Nuclear Science.

zircaloy-clad fuel elements, which are arranged within thecore as a 19x19 lattice with interstitial cooling channels andwith a thick radial reflector. The agile design of the control
system and the graphite heat sink has made TREAT a flexible
tool because it can operate at specifically adapted transientpulse shapes in accordance with the experiment in question.
Its steady-state power is 120 kW, and in pulse mode thepeak can reach up to 19 GW.

© Rsb8382

Initial commissioning activities are now underway toprepare the facility for the start of experimental campaigns.
These preparatory activities will include operator qualifications,
instrument testing, radiological characterisation and detailed
calibration of the core’s operational characteristics – including
heat balance, reactivity control and rod worth measurements,
as well as trial transients. To complement these campaigns,
experimental vehicles that contain the test sample andits specific instrumentation, while providing bespoke
environmental conditions, are under design and engineering
at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL). The first experimental
results from TREAT are expected before the start of 2019.

TREAT subpile room, Idaho, United States.

T

he restart of another key element in the national
and international nuclear science infrastructure wascompleted at the end of 2017. After an extended shutdown
lasting more than 23 years, the Transient Reactor Test Facility(TREAT) in Idaho, United States, successfully achieved its
first criticality on 14 November 2017. The US Department ofEnergy (DOE) has been working on this restart programme
since 2013 in order to add a key element to the ongoingproject to develop, test and qualify accident tolerant fuels(ATFs). These innovative ATFs can enhance the safety
resilience of the nuclear power reactor fleet worldwide once
deployed in an industrial setting.
TREAT is a graphite-moderated, air-cooled, thermalspectrum test facility designed to evaluate reactor fuels andstructural materials under simulated nuclear excursions andtransient power/cooling mismatch situations. Highly enricheduranium fuel is homogeneously interspersed within the

10 | NEA News 2018 – No. 35.2

From an international perspective, TREAT is a fundamental
asset that will be a strong complement to other facilities,
including the Cabri facility discussed in the article on
page 6, with both facilities offering different ranges in termsof the experimental design. Multi-national partnerships
with research, development and regulatory bodies, forexample between the Idaho National Laboratory, the French
Alternative Energies and Atomic Energy Commission (CEA)
and the French Institute for Radiation Protection and Nuclear
Safety (IRSN), are already in place to enable collaboration.
TREAT will be used as an instrument to validate novel
computational codes – these multi-purpose simulation
tools are under development among American national
laboratories and academic partners. As such, the intended
benefits offered by the TREAT restart include positive
impacts to basic science, nuclear safety and the economic
viability of the wider power industry.
An article outlining TREAT and Cabri experimental
capabilities that address nuclear fuel behaviour underreactivity-initiated accidents (RIAs) will be included in a later
edition of NEA News.

NEA UPDATESThe NEA inspiring female leadersin science and engineeringby Y. Hah and T. Saito
Ms Yeonhee Hah (yeonhee.hah@oecd.org) is Head of Division and Mr Tomoyuki Saito (tomoyuki.saito@oecd.org) is Nuclear Safety
Specialist in the NEA Division of Radiological Protection and Human Aspects of Nuclear Safety.

D

espite progress over the past decades, women remain
under-represented in executive positions in science,technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) fields.
Female students tend to do very well in math and science earlyin their academic careers but often take other career paths.
At the university level, in 2014, only 37% of new entrants
into tertiary-level science programmes (OECD average) were
women (see Figure 1). This percentage is even lower forengineering, manufacturing and construction programmes(24%), and less than 20% (OECD average) of women enter
into computer science programmes.
A similar trend can be seen in the workforce. In
OECD countries, men are almost four times as likely as
women to be employed in engineering and computing, withwomen also remaining under-represented in leadership
positions in these fields. Women have a far less chance of
becoming CEOs, sitting on boards of private companies orof holding public leadership positions (see Figure 2). Several

factors can explain why women do not pursue careers in
STEM fields, including the “leaky pipeline” phenomenon,
which translates into fewer opportunities for women to reach
top-level positions. Women often interrupt their careers tocare for family, work part-time to balance professional andpersonal demands, or face some form of discrimination in
the workplace.
Many countries are working to close the gender gap
by developing policies to reverse this trend, and some
progress has been made, with most OECD countries tackling
workplace harassment and discrimination through stronger
laws and regulations. Additionally, several countries, including
Australia, Germany, Italy, Japan, Mexico and the United
Kingdom, have introduced measures to encourage young girls
to study in STEM fields.1 Nonetheless, gender gaps persist
in all areas of social and economic life across countries, andthe size of these gaps has seen little change in recent years,
making it evident that more work still needs to be done.

Figure 1: Women are under-represented among new entrants in STEM fields in higher education
Proportion (%) of new students entering tertiary education who are female, by field of education (OECD average, 2014)
Proportion (%) of new entrants into tertiary education that are female
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

Education

Healthand welfare

Humanities
and arts

Social sciences,businessand law

Services

Agriculture

Sciences

Engineering,
manufacturing
and construction

(8%)

(14%)

(14%)

(31%)

(6%)

(2%)

(9%)

(15%)

Note: The figures in parentheses under the x-axis labels indicate the share (%) of all new entrants in each field of education.
Source: OECD (2017), The Pursuit of Gender Equality: An Uphill Battle.

1.	 See OECD (2017), The Pursuit of Gender Equality: An Uphill Battle, OECD Publishing, Paris

11

Figure 2: Women are under-represented in management positions
Female share of management employment and female share of labour force, all ages, 2015 or latest available year
Note: OECD partner countries and accession candidates are indicated in grey.

The looming shortfall of youth studying in STEM fields
has been a challenge for NEA countries as well and has real
implications for the future. As part of its overall strategy
and mission, the NEA supports its members in their efforts
to secure qualified human resources, build nuclear skills
capability and develop a new generation of nuclear experts.
To do so, it is essential to ensure that all young people,
including young women, have the opportunity to explore
careers in science and technology. The NEA thus encourages
its members to explore ways of attracting, recruiting andretaining youth, in particular girls, in science and technology,
as well as enhancing the conditions and prospects for womenand girls at every stage of their careers and education.

Source: OECD (2017), The Pursuitof Gender Equality: An Uphill Battle.

It is in this spirit that the NEA partnered with Japan’s
National Institutes for Quantum and Radiological Scienceand Technology (QST) to hold a mentoring workshop on
25-26 July 2017 in Chiba, Japan. The “Joshikai for Future
Scientists: International Mentoring Workshop in Science andEngineering” was held in conjunction with the QST’s first
International Symposium on Quantum Life Science. This twoday workshop opened during a joint session between the
QST symposium and the mentoring workshop, with remarksby Toshiei Mizuochi, State Minister of Education, Culture,
Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT); Toshio Hirano,
QST President; and Aiko Shimajiri, Special Advisor to the
Minister, Cabinet Office, Government of Japan. A keynote
lecture on quantum biology was given by Professor Johnjoe
McFadden of the University of Surrey, United Kingdom.
The joint opening session also featured an inspirational video
address by Hélène Langevin-Joliot, distinguished nuclear
physicist and granddaughter of Marie Skłodowska-Curie(See extracts from the transcript on page 14).

General view of the working groups.
QST, Japan

12 | NEA News 2018 – No. 35.2

Workshop Leadership(From left) Sachiko Yano, Asako J. Nakamura, Noriko Hosoya, William D. Magwood, IV, Shizuko Kakinuma, Aiko Shimajiri,
Claudie Haigneré, Rumina Velshi, Cynthia Pederson, Tatiana Ivanova, Yeonhee Hah and Aditi Verma.

T he co - chairs of the mentoring workshop,
Claudie Haigneré, Senior Advisor to the Director-General,
European Space Agency (ESA) and former astronaut, as
well as Shizuko Kakinuma, Director of the Department ofRadiation Effects Research (NIRS, QST) and the Unit Leaderof the QST Diversity Management Unit, delivered closing
remarks during a joint session with the QST symposium andreported on the outcomes of the workshop discussions. Overthe two-day event, 55 female students from high schools
around Japan, accompanied by 16 teachers, had the uniqueexperience of exchanging with 7 highly accomplishedwomen role models from Canada, France, Japan, Russia
and the United States. These mentors shared their real-life
experiences and provided valuable advice and insight to thestudents attending the workshop. Discussions addressed the
difficulties faced by women professionals in many parts of
the world and the steps that can be taken to support young
women who aspire to become science and technology
professionals. This workshop clearly highlighted the strong
desire of young women to meet with role models who are
pursuing successful careers in science and engineering.
Consideration is therefore being given to organising moreof such events that allow young students – both male andfemale – to see and exchange with those who are alreadyaccomplished in STEM fields. Science and engineering

leaders – especially women leaders – should be vocal about
why careers in science and technology are worthwhileand should be active in both social and traditional media
in order to serve as solid role models. Today’s students
need to be made aware of tomorrow’s wide array of STEM
career options. Policy makers also need to be involved tobetter understand and consider future generations’ needs
and concerns.
The NEA would like to support more mentoring eventsin other countries and provide students with formative
experiences to converse with leaders from nuclear sciences
and technology areas. Mentors are clearly needed to inspire
youth, offer real-life advice and help address questions such
as: What challenges do women face in STEM fields? How
can women ascend to leadership roles in these areas? How
did mentors build successful STEM careers while pursuingfull lives outside of work?
Women are, in many countries, an underused asset
that could help to provide the skills and capabilities that all
countries need to respond to an ever-changing, ever more
complex world. Female students would like to be a part of thesolution to the world’s challenges, and the NEA International
Mentoring Workshops can help reinforce young women’s
confidence to continue in the pursuit of their dreams.

See the video at: https://youtu.be/KQw19bwWVeM

13

Extracts from the interview with Dr Hélène Langevin-Joliot
Dr Langevin-Joliot is a distinguishedscientist and the granddaughter of Marie
Skłodowska‑Curie. She was interviewed on
film by NEA staff members and the resulting
video was shown at the opening of theInternational Mentoring Workshop in Japanin July 2017.

Her early interest in sciences
I would say that the idea of doing science came to me quite naturally.
My brother and I grew up in a family in which both parents werescientists.
I saw them going off to the laboratory; they used to talk about
what they did and they seemed very happy to be doing it. I didn’t
understand much of their scientific conversations, but I heard it
often. It was part of my universe.
My mother, rather than my father, who at that time had otherpreoccupations, encouraged me to carry out what you might callsmall experiments.
At the time, it was really easy to buy substances like alums orsulphates to make beautiful coloured crystals; you didn’t haveto tell the chemist shop why you wanted to buy them. It wasn’t
at all difficult to get bits of chemistry equipment – nothing very
complicated but good enough for having fun. So, with lots ofpatience, I was able to grow some very pretty crystals.

On Toshiko Yuasa – a renowned Japanese
nuclear physicist who worked in France
under Frédéric Joliot-Curie at the Collège deFranceI think that given the cultural differences in Japan, it can bevery important to tell young Japanese women about global
opportunities, to encourage them and to give them the possibilityof going abroad.
Ah! Toshiko Yuasa … she was quite someone!
An unforgettable personality…
I saw her for the first time here in the garden when she was young,and I’ll never forget it …
When you think of her career, it’s nevertheless extraordinary.
Because remember that, at the time, she couldn’t finish secondary
education without special permission. All sorts of things, such asentering a laboratory, were harder for her than for Marie Curie. She
always said that the book Madame Curie: A Biography, written by myaunt [Eve Curie], had in a way made Marie her mentor, urging her
to like science, to want to do science and to not hesitate to leave
her country to go where she could to do science under the best
conditions. She had started in Japan and realised very quickly that
she wouldn’t get very far, so she left her home country to do her
thesis in distant Paris.

Society’s role regarding women

A childhood memory
I was a secondary school student at the start of
the German Occupation. We had moral training
as part of the new programmes, which wereheavily influenced by the conception of therole of women in Nazi Germany, with the three
K’s: Kirche (church), Kuche (kitchen) and Kinder(children). This was moral training for young
girls of 12, 13 or 14 being told, “See, that’s
your future!” I raised my hand in the class,stood up and explained that no, certainly not,that wasn’t the way things had to be done. Of
course a woman should have a career; like theboys, there was no reason why not. It meantthat women would be free, and so on and soforth – I added lots of explanations, given myage at the time.

Joshikai for
Future Scientists

Programme and Speaker Biographies
International Mentoring Workshop
in Science and Engineering
25-26 July 2017
Chiba, Japan

I can still remember telling my mom what I
had done. She approved, of course, and thensuddenly she stopped and asked, “Do you think that every woman
has a job as interesting as mine?” And I realised at that momentthat for me, having a profession meant just that, or somethingequivalent. Well, that really made me think, and she went on to
say that a woman should have the right to have a job and choose
a career.

Having self-confidence

it doesn’t work.

You know, people have wonderful theories,
saying it’ll work if we appoint women, etc. But
they’ve created conditions in the society that are
extremely discouraging for women who wish tohave a career.
I think we need to be sure that the conditions
allow compromises. Surely there are someyoung Japanese women who say, “I have nofamily responsibilities; I’m as free as a bird; I dowhat I want”. That’s all very well. But it seems tome that for a greater number, it’s important thatthe family aspects are sorted out.
I’m convinced that handling these aspects is
the key to having more women working in
all areas of research, including technologicalresearch in industry, because if we takeaway their freedom to have families, which
may form a real part of their lives, well,

At the end of the 1930s, my mother, as Secretary of State forscientific research, was asked, “What do you wish for young
women?” My mother’s response was not very feminist. She replied,“I wish all young women to have what I have myself: a beloved
husband, children and a job that fascinates them.” If you view life
like that, it’s easier to pursue science.

I also think that women should work on acquiring more confidence
so that they can make their presence felt, which is something that
doesn’t come naturally to them. But women also have one trait thatsometimes makes them pass up a promotion or an opportunity.
They usually – much more so than men – ask themselves thequestion, “Do I have the ability to take on this responsibility?”
I think that women should still keep this in mind, but not, however,to the point of being too timid.

My advice to young women

It would also be a good idea for women to express themselves evenwhen they are not directly involved, so they come to mind whenpeople are looking for someone to take over a particular function
important for the future of the laboratory or project, etc. They could
offer an opinion, suggest how something should be done. Every
woman should consider her own capabilities and the possibilities
in a particular area.

I believe that the issue is generalised and simplified down to a problem
for women, and for women only. I believe much more in talking
about things, airing the problems that exist and confronting them.

So the first thing is a career, and if you want to be a scientist, you’ll
go into science.
When I give talks on Marie Curie, I tell people what she said herself:“I haven’t sacrificed my life to science; I’ve spent a lot of time on
science because I wanted to”. But she also wanted to spend timewith her daughters. That’s right!

I think that it is the real crux of the matter, and it doesn’t please
everyone because it requires some effort on the part of men. And
it requires support from society to make it possible. That’s all.

See the interview at: https://youtu.be/_AOQ8os3Pr0

14 | NEA News 2018 – No. 35.2

NEA UPDATESMetadata for radioactive waste
management
by M. Ciambrella
Mr Massimo Ciambrella (massimo.ciambrella@oecd.org) is Junior Radioactive Waste Management Specialist in the NEA Division ofRadioactive Waste Management.

Figure 1: Repository life phases and examples of major decision points
Short term

Pre-operational phase

Medium term

Operational phase

Post-operational phase

Oversight, direct and indirect

Construction

Sitingdecision

Construction
decisionM

Waste emplacement

Decision to
begin disposal

Decision on
partialbackfillingLong term

Oversight indirect

Undergroundobservation

Decision to end
emplacing waste

any countries have implemented national programmes
for the safe, ethical and economically sustainable
management of radioactive waste – including spent nuclear
fuel considered as waste – from the generation of such
waste to its disposal (i.e. “from cradle to grave”). One of thechallenges that the radioactive waste management process
must tackle is the long-term management of data andinformation that are collected during each step of the process,and that have to be available in the subsequent steps as
the programme proceeds towards repository development.
From a general point of view, the realisation of a radioactive
waste repository requires very large amounts of data acrossmultiple and disparate disciplines of science and technology
such as nuclear science, waste management, geoscienceand engineering. National programmes tend to run over a
period of many decades, with evolving changes in relation
to boundary conditions (e.g. legal and regulatory framework),
generations of workers succeeding and determining dataand information loss risks, and the site characterisation
evolving and having an impact on the choices for the disposal
design system as well as the safety case. The developmentof a robust safety case, for example, for the post-closureof a deep geological repository requires the availability ofhuge volumes of data on the waste to be disposed of, theengineered barrier systems and the rock environment. These
data should be collected from the very beginning of theDecision on
final closure

Repository
closureNo oversight

The thickness of the redlines
represents the amount of humanactivity related to the repository

Decisions onfollow-up
provisions

programmes, without concern that time will erode the qualityof data. As long as the data are managed and maintained ina well-organised manner, safety analysts can be confident
about using the data for performance assessments, scenario
formulations and safety evidence elaborations.

Data, information and metadata
Data and information are two different concepts, and it is
not a trivial endeavour to find suitable definitions for the twoterms. The Latin origins of the words help to demonstrate
the difference in meaning: data comes from datum meaning
something given, whereas information comes from informatio
meaning idea, notion and also explanation. If data areconsidered as facts in the form they are originally collected(e.g. numbers, functions, tables, strings, texts, pictures,videos), then information could be considered as organised
and structured data presenting an idea or a concept.
The main challenge of long-term data and information
management is to ensure that future users will not only
have access to the data collected, but that they will also
have confidence in these data and be able to understand theinformation they provide. The basic tenet of long-term dataand information management is that data are being collected
and managed for others to use them. Individual R&D teams

15

and scientists who are currently involved in national
programmes for radioactive waste management have to beaware that they are collecting data not only for themselves
but also for future users, including future generations of theirown colleagues.
The challenges emanating from the long -term
management of large volumes of data and information arecertainly not limited to radioactive waste management, butinvolve modern society at a global level. We are living in an
era of big data where extremely large collections of data
are produced by all societal sectors every second of the day
for multiple and extensive purposes, from industry to social
media, and from digital marketing to geographic information
systems. Experts involved have been developing specificand powerful tools and techniques to address these modern
challenges, and for the most part these tools and techniques
are included under the heading of “metadata”.
Metadata are usually defined as “data about data”.
They are additional data that structure and organise data,
providing them context and allowing the user to understandthe information that they contain. For example, they:• provide provenance to the data: who, what, when,
where, why and how (i.e. the famous Six W’s);• provide context to facilitate the accurate interpretation,and use or reuse of data;• describe and maintain the original data quality;• add additional information about the data in a structured
and detailed way;
• help users to quickly find the data that they are looking
for and support the search for information.

Metadata in radioactive waste
management: RepMet
The NEA Integration Group for the Safety Case (IGSC),
under the auspices of the Radioactive Waste Management
Committee (RWMC), launched a four-year initiative in 2014
called Radioactive Waste Repository Metadata Management(RepMet). The goal of this initiative is to bring about a better
understanding of metadata and its implementation in theradioactive waste management field in support of national
programmes. To highlight the significance of the subject,
several radioactive waste management organisations(RWMOs) and research laboratories from NEA countries were16 | NEA News 2018 – No. 35.2

involved in launching RepMet, including: ANDRA (France),
ENRESA (Spain), JAEA (Japan), NAGRA (Switzerland),RWM (United Kingdom), NWMO (Canada), ONDRAF/NIRAS(Belgium), Posiva Oy (Finland), PURAM (Hungary), Sandia
National Laboratories (United States), SKB (Sweden) and
SURAO (Czech Republic).1
RepMet experts have elaborated some overall
recommendations for RWMOs concerning metadata
implementation, illustrating the benefits and underlining therisks arising from their neglect. Members of the RepMet
initiative analysed the phases of metadata implementation,
focusing on the need for a robust metadata culture in
RWMOs and a solid commitment at all organisational levels
to the definition of policies and consequent procedures forthe capture and long-term maintenance of metadata. All ofthese considerations have been collected in a high-level
report targeting RWMO decision makers and managers. This
report will be released in 2018.
From a more technical point of view, the RepMet group
worked on the conceptual design of databases2 – the so-called
RepMet Libraries – so as to address topics relevant to national
radioactive waste management programmes, making
use of the metadata sets that members selected. For thedevelopment of the libraries, RepMet examined and adopted
several concepts of the data modelling theory (i.e. EntityRelationship Diagrams [ERDs]) and selected metadata-based
tools such as consolidated metadata standards or relevant
directives (i.e. the ISO 3 19156 Geographic Information –Observations and Measurements [O&M] Standard, theMinnesota Recordkeeping Metadata Standard [MRMS] andthe European Union INSPIRE4 Directive), as well as controlled
dictionaries and formal languages for their representation(i.e. the World Web Consortium [W3C] Resource Description
Framework [RDF] and the W3C Simple Knowledge
Organization System [SKOS]). The RepMet Libraries pertain
to the main technical disciplines involved in the realisation ofa radioactive waste repository, which are geoscience, waste
management and engineering, and entail, respectively, the:• Site Characterisation Library – on the geological andgeophysical characterisation of the repository site;• Waste Package Library – on the packaged waste andspent nuclear fuel ready for disposal at the repository;• Repository Library – on the repository requirements andstructures at closure.

The RepMet Libraries are presented in detail in threetechnical reports, supported by an additional document
illustrating and explaining the concepts and the tools of themodern data and information management adopted for theirelaboration. To increase their visibility and to demonstrate theapplications of some web-based tools, the group developed
a web version of the three libraries called “RepMet
web-products”.

BNFL, United Kingdom

The elaboration of the scope of these three RepMet
Libraries was twofold, first to identify the core information
about the library topic representing the minimum andessential information that an RWMO should collectand maintain for multiple purposes (e.g. safety casedevelopment); and second, to give example applications of
how the assembly of metadata-based tools and techniques
can provide an original methodology to promote and support
the long-term management and use of core information thatthe group had identified in relation to each library topic.

View of a vitrified waste product store.

All RepMet final deliverables, including the reports andweb-products, will be available on the RepMet website5 inthe coming months.

Next steps
Over the past four years, RepMet has been working towards
the implementation of all the above activities. RepMet
members have recognised the importance of continuing
and increasing joint efforts in this field as the initiativenears the end of its mandate. Experts have thus identified
several working areas of interest for the future, including
the development of new libraries using the methodologythat RepMet assembled, which involves different topics toincrease the coverage of the radioactive waste management
life cycle (e.g. transport, interim storage and waste
treatment). The current libraries can also be extended,
increasing their level of detail and integrating them withother IGSC projects, such as the NEA International Features,
Events and Processes (FEP) Database. Metadata sets that
RepMet has identified can also be used for modelling, notonly the properties of objects such as waste packages, butalso the safety assessment process chains tailor-made forthe needs of the radioactive waste industry.

Conclusions
Metadata play a crucial role in modern data and information
management and have a fundamental function in themost innovative sectors of society. Radioactive waste
management can take extensive advantage of metadata
implementation since poor data quality and unclear
information are considerable risks for the consistent andappropriate evolution of national programmes for radioactive
waste management.
RepMet is the first international study at the NEAlevel on metadata application in the field of radioactive
waste management, and it is intended to support national
programmes in managing their data and information in a waythat is both suitable for long-term management and use, andharmonised internationally. The RepMet focus on modern
tools for metadata, emerging from a constantly evolving
field, represents a further example of the continuous andsignificant engagement of the NEA in spreading innovation
through co-operation among international experts, and in thisway contributing to the sustainable use of nuclear energy.

Notes
1.	 ANDRA – French National Agency for Radioactive Waste
Management; ENRESA – Spanish National Company forRadioactive Waste Management; JAEA – Japan Atomic
Energy Agency; NAGRA – Swiss National Cooperative forthe Disposal of Radioactive Waste; RWM – Radioactive
Waste Management, NWMO – Canadian Nuclear Waste
Management Organisation, ONDRAF/NIRAS – Belgian
Agency for Radioactive Waste and Enriched Fissile; PURAM– Hungarian Public Limited Company for Radioactive Waste
Management; SKB – Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste
Management Company; SURAO – Czech Radioactive Waste
Repository Authority.
2.	 A “data model” is the organisational and structural model ofa database as related to a specific business domain such asradioactive waste management. A “conceptual data model”(CDM) is a type of data model: it describes the organisationand the structure of a database in terms of objects ofinterest, together with their descriptive properties andlogical associations. CDMs are not related to the softwareand hardware technology used for the database realisation.
They allow RepMet members to represent data in a way thatis independent from the IT systems.
3.	 ISO – International Organisation for Standardisation.
4.	 INSPIRE – Infrastructure for Spatial Information in Europe.
5.	 www.oecd-nea.org/rwm/igsc/repmet.

References
Atzeni, P. et al. (2014), Basi di dati, 4th Edition, McGraw-Hill
Education.
NEA (2017), “Summary Record of the 7th RepMet Meeting”,
NEA/RWM/IGSC(2017)3.
NEA (2016), “NEA Radioactive Waste Management CommitteeStatement”, NEA/RWM(2016)7.
NEA (2014), “Vision Document for the Radioactive Waste
Repository Metadata Management (RepMet) Project”,­NEA/­RWM(2014)2.
Castiglioni, L. et al. (1966), IL Vocabolario della Lingua Latina,
1st Edition, Loescher Editore.

17

NEA BRIEFS

A strategic partnership between
the NEA and China
by G. Piccarreta
Ms Giovanna Piccarreta (giovanna.piccarreta@oecd.org) is Counsel for International Affairs.

The NEA Director-General William D. Magwood, IV recently met with the Chairman of
the China Atomic Energy Authority (CAEA), Mr Tang Dengjie.

W

ith 37 operational nuclear power reactors that areamong the world’s most advanced, 19 units underconstruction – and 18 additional reactors currently in
preparation (i.e. site approved or under review) – as well
as 25 years of operating experience, China has the largest
nuclear power programme worldwide today and is developing
vast technological capabilities.
The NEA mission is to bring together the world’s mostadvanced countries to maintain and further develop thescientific, technological and legal bases required for a safe,
environmentally sound and economical use of low-carbon
nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. China has become
increasingly active in NEA activities over the past few
years. For instance, China participates in the Committee on
Nuclear Regulatory Activities (CNRA), the Committee on the
Safety of Nuclear Installations (CSNI) and the Nuclear Law
Committee (NLC), as well as in selected NEA working groups
under different Standing Technical Committees. The country
is also a full participant in the Generation IV International
Forum (GIF), the Multinational Design Evaluation Programme(MDEP) and the International Framework for Nuclear Energy
Cooperation (three NEA-serviced bodies) and is involved in a
number of NEA joint projects.
NEA Director-General William D. Magwood, IV andNEA staff have intensified meetings and visits to China
so as to further develop this strategic partnership. The
Director‑General recently met with the Chairman of the
China Atomic Energy Authority (CAEA), Mr Tang Dengjie,
who underlined CAEA willingness to enhance engagementwith the NEA.

18 | NEA News 2018 – No. 35.2

In the context of this progressively increasingcollaboration, several agreements have been signed
between the Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) and China inrecent years, including in 2013 when the Joint Declaration
on Co-operation with the CAEA was signed; in 2014, with theMemorandum of Understanding with the National Nuclear
Safety Administration (NNSA); and in April 2017 with thesigning of the Memorandum of Understanding between the
NEA and the National Energy Administration (C/NEA).
NEA countries consider this collaboration with China asa major strategic axis in the current period, with significant
expected cross benefits. China can draw greatly from theexperience of 33 NEA member countries, notably as pertains
to nuclear regulatory activities and inspection practices,
radiological protection and emergency management, as
well as stakeholder involvement, public communication andradioactive waste management. Regarding the evolution of
nuclear technology, the cross-fertilisation of NEA country
experiences with the Chinese dynamic in the field could
facilitate and streamline the development of the innovations
required for nuclear energy to be part of the solution to
enable a low-carbon energy mix.

International Nuclear Law Essentials
in Singapore
by K. Nick
Ms Kimberly Nick (kimberly.nick@oecd.org) is Senior Legal Adviser in the Office of Legal Counsel.

Shutterstock, De Burachet

The decision was therefore made to hold the next
session of the INLE in Singapore, in co-operation with the
National University of Singapore (NUS). The 2018 INLE
will take place on the NUS Bukit Timah Campus, home to the
NUS Faculty of Law and the Centre for International Law(CIL). The NUS is consistently ranked among the world’s
best as a leading global university. Holding the INLE at NUS
should allow the INLE to attract experts from all over theregion and beyond.

The next session of INLE will be held in Singapore
from 26 February to 2 March 2018.

O

ne of the missions of the NEA is to help create thesound national and international legal regimes required
for the peaceful uses of nuclear energy and to serve as aleading centre for nuclear law information and education.
Training future and practising lawyers in the public and private
sectors is essential to ensure appropriate and applicable legal
frameworks. In this context, the NEA International Schoolof Nuclear Law (ISNL), a two-week summer course in thesouth of France, was created in 2001 and has been held in
co-operation with the University of Montpellier for the pastseventeen years. To date, more than 950 participants fromall continents have attended this course.
A second NEA programme, International Nuclear Law
Essentials (INLE), was created in 2011 as a one-week course
for professionals. This five-day programme is designed toprovide participants with a practical and comprehensive
understanding of the various inter-related legal issues
associated with the safe and peaceful use of nuclear energy.
The INLE is an intensive course in international nuclear law
that addresses the needs and interests of lawyers working
in either the public or the private sector. It is also of interestto scientists, engineers, policy makers, managers and otherprofessionals working in the nuclear field.
In recent years, the NEA has witnessed a shift in thenationality of applicants to its legal educational programmes,with greater numbers originating from the Asian region. As
more nuclear power reactors come online in Asia, the needfor nuclear law education and training in the region has
been growing.

The 2018 INLE programme will remain very similar toprevious programmes. It will again be conducted under
the leadership of Paul Bowden, Partner at Freshfields
Bruckhaus and Deringer LLP, London, United Kingdom,
and comprehensive lectures will be delivered by renowned
specialists in nuclear law from international organisations,
governments and private industry. The traditional subjects
will be covered during the five-day programme, including:• international radiological protection standards;• nuclear safety, regulation and licensing;• environmental law and nuclear activities;• management of spent fuel and radioactive waste;• transport of nuclear materials and fuel;• nuclear security: physical protection, illicit trafficking
and terrorism;• non-proliferation and international safeguards fornuclear materials;• liability, compensation and insurance for nuclear
damage;• international trade in nuclear materials and equipment.
New lecturers from the region will also be part of the
programme and will focus on nuclear energy in Asia.
The 2018 INLE will provide a unique opportunity to learn
nuclear law in a new setting and to network with individuals
in the field that participants might not normally have a chance
to meet. Participation is open to anyone who has at least one
year of relevant professional experience and who has a basic
understanding of law as it relates to nuclear energy.
The 2018 programme includes admission for the participant to the general lecture and discussion sessions. Moreinformation, including the draft programme and the application form, can be found at: www.oecd-nea.org/law/inle.

19

The NEA thanks outgoing NRA
Chairman Dr Shunichi Tanaka
by T. Niioka
Mr Terumasa Niioka (terumasa.niioka@oecd.org) is Nuclear Safety Specialist in the NEA Division of Nuclear Safety Technology
and Regulation.

Responsibility for nuclear non-proliferation safeguards,
previously the onus of the Ministry of Education, Culture,
Sports, Science and Technology, was also integrated into
the NRA.
From 2012, the NRA has been disseminating nuclear
regulation and other activities via several proactive and prompt
channels, including the NRA website, which excludes forconfidentiality reasons information on nuclear security andrelated issues. NRA meetings are generally open to the public
for the transparent dissemination of information.

The framed letter presented by Mr Magwood
to Dr Tanaka in July 2017.

A

mong the hard lessons identified through the analysis of
the 2011 Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant accident
in Japan was that the regulator at the time of the accident was
far too much a part of the “nuclear village”. It was thus notinstitutionally equipped to provide effective safety oversightto Japan’s nuclear industry, and a loss of public confidence inthe regulator resulted – a condition that is, even under normal
circumstances, difficult to remediate.
Following the accident, the government of Japan moved
quickly and effectively to establish a new regulator, drawing
from successful models in other countries. The Nuclear andIndustrial Safety Agency had previously been responsible forthe regulation of nuclear safety under the Ministry of Economy,
Trade and Industry (METI), which itself was responsible for theuse of nuclear power. To ensure a transparent separation ofthese two sectors, nuclear safety regulation was decoupledfrom METI, and a new Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA)
was established in September 2012 as an external organisationof the Ministry of the Environment with a high degree of
independence.
Creating the NRA would be only the start of a long journey.
The hardest work would be to rebuild public trust in thenational nuclear regulator; to establish new safety standards
that would be applied to Japanese nuclear facilities before they
could restart operations; and to build an organisation and staff
capable of fulfilling the nuclear safety mission.
Under Dr Shunichi Tanaka’s leadership – the first
NRA Chairman for a period of five years beginning in
September 2012 – the NRA took steps to address such challenges
and to establish a robust foundation for the new regulatoryorganisation. The roles and responsibilities of nuclear safety
and security regulations for nuclear facilities and radioactive
materials, which had been shared among several governmentalorganisations, all came under the auspices of the NRA.

20 | NEA News 2018 – No. 35.2

Taking into account lessons learnt from Fukushima Daiichi
NPP accident, and the current state of the art in scienceand technology, the NRA has also been enhancing nuclear
regulations, for example, by developing countermeasuresagainst severe accidents, introducing back-fit systems, as well
as 40-year operational time limits for nuclear reactor facilities.
In addition, the Nuclear Emergency Preparedness Commission
was established under the Japanese Cabinet Office to enhance
the nuclear emergency preparedness and response system.
The progress made over the last five years by the NRA
in all the above areas has been extraordinary and heartening.
Dr Tanaka has led NRA efforts across uncharted and often
contentious waters of the post-Fukushima environment, allwith care and wisdom. He has employed a sound approachto regulatory decision making based on an independent andcompetent assessment of the most current scientific andtechnological information, free from external pressure or bias.
The NEA programme of work in nuclear safety technology
and regulation has benefited greatly from the technicalcontributions and support of the NRA during Dr Tanaka’s
tenure as NRA Chairman, and thus the NEA would like to thankDr Tanaka for his long-standing and continuing support andwish him every success and fulfilment in the future.
The NEA Director-General William D. Magwood, IV
presented Dr Tanaka with a letter of recognition during his visit
to Japan on the occasion of the “Joshikai for Future Scientists:
International Mentoring Workshop in Science and Engineering”(see article on page 11) in July 2017. When meeting Dr Tanaka,
Mr Magwood presented him with the framed letter that hehad signed alongside the Chair of the Steering Committee for
Nuclear Energy, as well as the Chairs of the NEA Committee on
Nuclear Regulatory Activities (CNRA) and the NEA Committee
on the Safety of Nuclear Installations (CSNI). The letter
highlights the unique and historic role that Dr Tanaka playedin confronting challenges that arose during the years following
the Fukushima Daiichi accident.
Many of these challenges will require years and even
decades of hard work to resolve and so the NEA takes thisopportunity to wish Dr Tanaka’s successor, Toyoshi Fuketa,
the best in facing continuing challenges and applauds his
inauguration promise to “uncompromisingly pursue safety”.

NEA JOINT PROJECTS

Update on NEA Joint Projects
Nuclear safety, nuclear science, radioactive waste
management, radiological protection
NEA joint projects and information exchange programmes enable interested countries, on a cost-sharing basis, to pursue research or
the sharing of data with respect to particular areas or issues in the nuclear energy field. The projects are carried out under the auspices,and with the support, of the NEA.
At present, 17 joint projects are being conducted or completed in relation to nuclear safety, 2 in the area of nuclear science (advanced
fuels, and characterisation of fuel debris and fission products), 2 in support of radioactive waste management and 1 in the field ofradiological protection. These projects complement the NEA programme of work and contribute to achieving excellence in each areaof research.

Advanced Thermal-hydraulic Test Loop for
Accident Simulation (ATLAS) Project

Behaviour of Iodine Project (BIP)
Contact: martin.kissane@oecd.org

Contact: nils.sandberg@oecd.org

Current mandate: January 2016-December 2018

Current mandate: October 2017-September 2020

Budget: EUR 1 million

Budget: EUR 3 million
Participants: Belgium, China, Czech Republic, France,
Germany, Korea, Spain, Switzerland, United Arab Emirates
and United States.

•• provide experimental data for resolving key light water
reactor (LWR) thermal-hydraulics safety issues related tolong-term coolability with partial core blockage, passive
core makeup during station blackout, intermediate size
loss-of-coolant accidents and design extension condition
scenarios such as multiple steam generator tube ruptures;•• provide an integral-­effect experimental database, which
will be used to validate code predictive capability andaccuracy of models.

Participants: Belgium, Canada, Finland, France, Germany,
Japan, Korea, Sweden, Switzerland, Sweden, United
Kingdom and United States.

•• obtain a more detailed and mechanistic understanding of
iodine adsorption/desorption on containment surfaces bymeans of new experiments with well-characterised containment paints and paint constituents, and novel instrumentation (spectroscopic methods);•• obtain a more detailed and mechanistic understanding oforganic iodide formation by means of new experimentswith well-characterised containment paints and paintconstituents, and novel instrumentation (chromatographic
methods);•• develop a common understanding of how to extrapolatewith confidence from small-scale studies to reactor-scaleconditions.

The ATLAS facility.
KAERI, Korea

21

The Cherenkov blue light of the Cabri
reactor became visibleon 12 October 2016
in Cadarache, France.
IRSN/CEA, France

Benchmark Study of the Accident at the
Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant (BSAF)

Cabri International Project (CIP)
Contact: martin.kissane@oecd.org

Contact: kentaro.funaki@oecd.org

Current mandate: March 2015-March 2018

Current mandate: April 2015-June 2018

Budget: ≈ EUR 74 million

Budget: EUR 270 K
Participants: Canada, China, Finland, France, Germany,
Japan, Korea, Russia, Spain, Switzerland andUnited States.

•• provide information and analyse results on severe accident(SA) progression, fission product (FP) behaviour, sourceterm estimation and comparison with measured plantdata within the first three weeks of the Fukushima Daiichi
accident at units 1 to 3, respectively, to support the safe
and timely decommissioning of Fukushima Daiichi NPP;•• contribute to understanding of SA phenomena that took

place during the accident, through comparisons with participants’ analysis results and with measured plant data;•• share the above results with the objective of improving
methods and models of the SA codes applied in each participating organisation, in order to reduce uncertainties in
the SA analysis and validate the SA analysis codes using
data obtained through the decommissioning process.

Cable Ageing Data and Knowledge (CADAK)
Project
Contact: ollivilhelm.nevander@oecd.org
Current mandate: January 2015-December 2017*
Budget: EUR 50 K/year
Participants: Canada, Germany, Slovak Republic,
Switzerland and United States.

•• establish the technical basis for assessing the qualified life

Participants: Czech Republic, Finland, France, Germany,
Japan, Korea, Slovak Republic, Spain, Sweden,
Switzerland, United Kingdom and United States.

•• extend the database for high burn-up fuel performance inreactivity-­induced accident (RIA) conditions;•• perform relevant tests under coolant conditions representative of pressurised water reactors (PWRs);•• extend the database to include tests done in the Nuclear

Safety Research Reactor (Japan) on boiling water reactor(BWR) and PWR fuel.

Component Operational Experience,
Degradation and Ageing Programme (CODAP)Contact: ollivilhelm.nevander@oecd.org
Current mandate: January 2018-December 2020
Budget: EUR 75 K/year
Participants: Canada, Chinese Taipei, Czech Republic,
Finland, France, Germany, Japan, Korea, Netherlands,
Slovak Republic, Spain, Switzerland and United States.

•• collect information on passive metallic component degra-

dation and failures of the primary system, reactor pressure
vessel (RPV) internals, main process and standby safetysystems, and support systems (i.e. ASME Code Class 1,
2 and 3 or equivalent), as well as non-safety-related (noncode) components with significant operational impact;•• establish a knowledge base for general information on•• enter, for a number of member countries, cable data andcomponent and degradation mechanisms such as applicable regulations, codes and standards, bibliography andreferences, R&D programmes and proactive actions,information on key parameters, models, thresholds andkinetics, fitness for service criteria, and information on
mitigation, monitoring, surveillance, diagnostics, repair
and replacement;•• estimate the remaining qualified lifetime of cables used•• develop topical reports on degradation mechanismsof electrical cables in light of the uncertainties identified
following initial (early) qualification testing;information in the system, e.g. technical standards being
applied in the qualification of cables and inspection methods being used regularly;
in NPPs.

* This project has been discontinued and a final report will be
issued in 2018.

22 | NEA News 2018 – No. 35.2

in close co-ordination with the CSNI Working Groupon Integrity and Ageing of Components and Structures(WGIAGE).

Co-operative Programme for the Exchangeof Scientific and Technical Information
Concerning Nuclear Installation
Decommissioning Projects (CPD)
Contact: jihtong.lin@oecd.org
Current mandate: January 2014-December 2018
Budget: ≈ EUR 80 K/year
Participants: Belgium, Canada, Chinese Taipei, Denmark,European Commission, France, Germany, Italy, Japan,
Korea, Russia, Slovak Republic, Spain, Sweden,
United Kingdom and United States.

•• exchange scientific and technical information among

nuclear facility decommissioning projects, based on biannual meetings of the Technical Advisory Group, to ensurethat the safest, most environmentally sound and economical options for decommissioning are employed.

Fire Propagation in Elementary, Multi-room
Scenarios (PRISME) ProjectContact: andrew.white@oecd.org
Current mandate: January 2017-December 2021
Budget: EUR 7 million
Participants: Belgium, Canada, Finland, France, Germany,
Japan, Spain, Sweden and United Kingdom.

•• answer questions concerning smoke, fire and heat propagation inside a plant by means of experiments tailoredfor code validation purposes for fire modelling computercodes;•• undertake experiments related to smoke and hot gas

propagation, through a horizontal opening between two
superimposed compartments;•• provide information on heat transfer to cables and on cabledamage;•• provide information on the effectiveness of fire extinguishFire Incidents Records Exchange (FIRE) ProjectContact: markus.beilmann@oecd.org
Current mandate: January 2016-December 2019

ing systems.

Halden Reactor Project

Budget: EUR 70 K/year

Contact: markus.beilmann@oecd.org

Participants: Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, Finland,
France, Germany, Japan, Korea, Netherlands, Spain,
Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom and United States.

Budget: NOK 444 million•• collect fire event experience (via international exchange)in the appropriate format and in a quality-assured and consistent database;•• collect and analyse fire events data over the long termso as to better understand such events, their causes andtheir prevention;•• generate qualitative insights into the root causes of fire
events in order to derive approaches or mechanisms fortheir prevention and to mitigate their consequences;•• establish a mechanism for the efficient feedback of

Current mandate: January 2018-December 2020

Participants: Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland,
France, Germany, Hungary, Japan, Korea, Norway,
Russia, Slovak Republic, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland,
United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United States andEuropean Commission.
Generate key information for safety and licensing
assessments with the aim of providing:•• extended fuel utilisation-basic data on how the fuelperforms, both under normal operation and transientconditions, with emphasis on extended fuel utilisation incommercial reactors;

experience gained in connection with fire, including thedevelopment of defences against their occurrence, suchas indicators for risk-informed and performance-based
inspections;•• degradation of core materials-knowledge of plant materi-•• record the characteristics of fire events in order to facil-•• man-machine systems-advances in computerised surveil-

itate fire risk analysis, including quantification of fire
frequencies.

als behaviour under the combined deteriorating effects ofwater chemistry and nuclear environment, also relevant
for plant lifetime assessments;

lance systems, virtual reality, digital information, humanfactors and man-machine interaction in support of control
room upgradings.

Halden reactor hall showing
the rotating floor plate above the cavity
containing the reactor vessel, Norway.
Thor Energy, Norway

23

High Energy Arcing Fault Events (HEAF)
Project

Information System on Occupational Exposure(ISOE)

Contact: markus.beilmann@oecd.org

Contact: olvido.guzman@oecd.org

Previous mandate: July 2012-December 2016
New mandate under discussion

Current mandate: January 2016-December 2019

Costs covered by the US NRC and in-kind
contributions
Participants: Canada, Finland, France, Germany, Japan,
Korea, Spain and United States.
Perform experiments to obtain scientific fire data onhigh energy arcing fault phenomena known to occur
in nuclear power plants through carefully designed
experiments:•• use data from the experiments and past events to develop
a mechanistic model to account for the failure modes andconsequence portions of HEAFs;•• improve the state of knowledge and provide better char-acterisation of HEAFs in fire probabilistic risk assessment(PRA) and US National Fire Protection Association (NFPA)
805 license amendment request applications;•• examine the initial impact of the arc to primary equipment
and the subsequent damage created by the initiation of anarc (e.g. secondary fires);

Budget: EUR 396 100
Participants: Armenia, Belarus, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria,
Canada, China, Czech Republic, Finland, France,
Germany, Hungary, Italy, Japan, Korea, Lithuania, Mexico,
Netherlands, Pakistan, Romania, Russia, Slovak Republic,
Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland,
Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom andUnited States.

•• collect, analyse and exchange occupational exposure dataand occupational exposure management experience at
NPPs;•• provide broad and regularly updated information on methods to improve the protection of workers and on occupational exposure in NPPs;•• provide a mechanism for dissemination of information onthese issues, including evaluation and analysis of the dataassembled and experience exchanged, as a contribution
to the optimisation of radiological protection.

•• use international collaboration to expand on the pool ofavailable test data and acquire authorship involvement in
the development of a new US NUREG that consequently
has international standing and applicability.

Hydrogen Mitigation Experiments for Reactor
Safety (HYMERES) ProjectContact: markus.beilmann@oecd.org
Current mandate: July 2017-June 2021
Budget: EUR 5 million
Participants: China, Czech Republic, Finland, Germany,
Japan, Korea, Russia, Spain, Switzerland and UnitedStates.
Improve the understanding of hydrogen risk phenomenology in containment in order to enhance modelling in
support of safety assessments that will be performed
for current and new NPPs. With respect to previous
projects related to hydrogen risk, HYMERES introduces
three new elements:•• tests addressing the interaction of safety components;•• realistic flow conditions;•• reviews of system behaviour for selected cases.

The PANDA reactor pressure vessel.
Paul Scherrer Institute, Switzerland

24 | NEA News 2018 – No. 35.2

The EPICUR apparatus used for experiments on
irradiating iodine species for the STEM project.
IRSN, FrancePrimary Coolant Loop Test Facility (PKL)
Project
Contact: nils.sandberg@oecd.org
Current mandate: July 2016-June 2020
Budget: EUR 4.78 million

International Common-cause Failure Data
Exchange (ICDE) ProjectContact: olli.nevander@oecd.org
Current mandate: January 2015-December 2018
Budget: EUR 120 K/year
Participants: Canada, Czech Republic, Finland, France,
Germany, Japan, Korea, Netherlands, Spain, Sweden,
Switzerland and United States.

•• provide a framework for multinational co-operation;•• collect and analyse common-cause failure (CCF) events

over the long term so as to better understand such events,
their causes and their prevention;•• generate qualitative insights into the root causes of CCF

events, which can then be used to derive approaches ormechanisms for their prevention or mitigation of theirconsequences;•• establish a mechanism for the efficient feedback of experi-ence gained in connection with CCF phenomena, including
the development of defences against their occurrence,such as indicators for risk-based inspections;•• generate quantitative insights and record event attributes

to facilitate the quantification of CCF frequencies inmember countries;•• use the ICDE data to estimate CCF parameters.

Participants: Belgium, China, Czech Republic, Finland,
France, Germany, Hungary, Japan, Korea, Spain, Sweden,
Switzerland, and United States.

•• investigate safety issues relevant for current PWR plants
as well as for new PWR design concepts;•• focus on complex heat transfer mechanisms in the steam
generators and boron precipitation processes under postulated accident situations.

Source Term Evaluation and Mitigation(STEM) ProjectContact: martin.kissane@oecd.org
Current mandate: January 2016-December 2019
Budget: EUR 2.5 million
Participants: Canada, Finland, France, Germany, Japan,
Korea, Sweden, United Kingdom and United States.
Improve the general evaluation of the source term, andin particular:•• perform experiments to study the stability of aerosol

particles under radiation and the long-term gas/deposits
equilibrium in a containment;•• conduct a literature survey on the effect of paint ageing;•• perform experiments to study ruthenium transport inpipes.

Loss of Forced Coolant (LOFC) ProjectContact: nils.sandberg@oecd.org

Studsvik Cladding Integrity Project (SCIP)

Current mandate: March 2011-March 2019

Contact: markus.beilmann@oecd.org

Budget: EUR 3 million

Current mandate: July 2014-June 2019

Participants: Czech Republic, France, Germany, Hungary,Japan, Korea and United States.
Perform integral tests in the high-temperature engineering test reactor (HTTR) in order to:•• provide experimental data to clarify the anticipated tran-sient without scram (ATWS) in the case of an LOFC withoccurrence of reactor re-criticality;•• provide experimental data to validate the key assumptions

Budget: SEK 130 million
Participants: Czech Republic, China, Finland, France,
Germany, Hungary, Japan, Korea, Norway, Russia, Spain,
Sweden, Switzerland and United States.

•• generate high-quality experimental data to improve theunderstanding of the dominant failure mechanisms forwater reactor fuels and devise means for reducing fuelfailures;in computer codes predicting the behaviour of reactor
kinetics, core physics and thermal-hydraulics related toprotective measures for safety;•• achieve results of general applicability (i.e. not restricted•• provide experimental data to verify the capabilities of•• achieve experimental efficiency through the judicious use

these codes regarding the simulation of phenomena coupled between reactor core physics and thermal-hydraulics.

to a particular fuel design, fabrication specification or operating condition);of a combination of experimental and theoretical techniques and approaches.

25

Thermal-hydraulics, Hydrogen, Aerosols,
Iodine (THAI) ProjectContact: martin.kissane@oecd.org
Current mandate: February 2016-July 2019
Budget: ≈ EUR 4.7million
Participants: Belgium, China, Czech Republic, Finland,
France, Germany, India, Hungary, Japan, Korea,
Luxembourg, Slovak Republic, Sweden, Switzerland andUnited Kingdom.
Address remaining questions and examine experimental data relevant to nuclear reactor containments under
severe accident conditions concerning:•• the release of fission products from a water pool;•• the resuspension of fission products;•• hydrogen combustion;•• passive autocatalytic recombiner (PAR) operation in coun-

THAI test facility: top view into the open
PAD vessel during instrumentation work.
Becker Technologies, Germany

ter-current flow conditions.

Thermochemical Database (TDB) ProjectContact: maria-eleni.ragoussi@oecd.org
Current mandate: April 2014-March 2018
Budget: EUR 1.5 million
Participants: Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, Finland,
France, Germany, Japan, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland,
United Kingdom and United States.
Produce a database that:•• contains data for elements of interest in radioactive waste
disposal systems;•• documents why and how the data were selected;•• gives recommendations based on original experimental
data, rather than on compilations and estimates;•• documents the sources of experimental data used;•• is internally consistent;•• addresses all solids and aqueous species of the elements
of interest for nuclear waste storage performance assessment calculations.

Thermodynamics of Advanced Fuels –International Database (TAF-ID) ProjectContact: davide.costa@oecd.org
Project agreement: January 2013-December 2017
Budget: ≈ EUR 470 K
Participants: Canada, France, Japan, Korea, Netherlands,
United Kingdom and United States.
Make available a comprehensive, internationally recognised thermodynamic database and associated phase
diagrams on nuclear fuel materials for the existing andfuture generation of nuclear reactors. Specific technicalobjectives this project intends to achieve are:•• predict the solid, liquid and/or gas phases formed during

fuel/cladding chemical interaction under normal and accident conditions;•• improve the control of experimental conditions during the
fabrication of fuel materials at high temperature;•• predict the evolution of the chemical composition of fuelunder irradiation versus temperature and burn-up.

26 | NEA News 2018 – No. 35.2

Thermodynamic Characterisation of Fuel
Debris and Fission Products Based on
Scenario Analysis of Severe Accident
Progression at Fukushima-Daiichi Nuclear
Power Station (TCOFF)
Contact: davide.costa@oecd.org
Project agreement: June 2017-December 2019
Budget: ≈ EUR 620 K
Participants: Czech Republic, European Commission,
France, Germany, Japan, Korea, Netherlands, Russia,
Sweden and Switzerland.
The TCOFF project will provide a framework for theexchange of technical information on topics related tothermodynamic databases available for modelling thefuel/core degradation process, which include thermodynamic functions/models, experimental data, calculation tools, calculation methods for quasi-equilibrium
systems, and prioritisation of items for improvement/
enlargement, with reference to the accidental scenario
at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power station (NPS).
The project aims to:•• improve the quality and/or inventory of thermodynamic

databases, which are used for severe accident analyses
with a reference to the severe accident progression at
different units of the Fukushima Daiichi NPS;•• conduct joint thermodynamic evaluations of the severe

accident progression at in-vessel and ex-vessel phases atunits 1, 2 and 3 of the Fukushima Daiichi NPS, aiming at
characterising fuel melting; molten core relocation; fission
product behaviour; the chemical and phase compositionof fuel debris; and the thermodynamic evaluation of theformation of materials, which may potentially be detected
at the Fukushima Daiichi NPS.

NEA PUBLICATIONS AND BROCHURES

General Interest

NEA No. 7398. 28 pages.
Available online at:
http://oe.cd/neabrochure

NEA Workshop on Stakeholder
Involvement in Nuclear Decision
Making2017

NEA Workshop
NEA Workshop on Stakeholder Involvement in Nuclear Decision Making

uclearnergy
gency

The Nuclear Energy Agency
brochureon Stakeholder Involvementin Nuclear Decision Making

Summary Report

Summary Report

NEA No. 7302. 83 pages.
Available online at: http://oe.cd/2aJ
See the video at:https://youtu.be/h4pb471lO6U

NEA

Radioactive Waste
2017

Management

ries andNational Invento
Spent
Strategies for

Waste
Management
and Radioactive
Nuclear Fuelgy for the
Extended Methodolon of Data
Common Presentatio

and Management

Radioactive waste
management

National Inventories

Nuclear development
and the fuel cycle

Strategies for

Data

2017

Energy Agency
by the Nuclear
AgencyA Joint Report
Atomic Energy
and the International

Addressing Uncer
ates

Données surl’énergie nucléaire2017

NEA No. 7365. 100 pages.
NEA

Available online at:
http://oe.cd/2aK

Nuclear Energy Data is the Nuclear Energy
Agency’s annual compilation of statistics
and country reports documenting nuclear
power status in NEA member countries andin the OECD area. Information provided bygovernments includes statistics on total
electricity produced by all sources and by
nuclear power, fuel cycle capacities andrequirements, and projections to 2035,
where available. Country reportssummarise energy policies, updates of thestatus in nuclear energy programmes andfuel cycle developments. In 2016, nuclear
power continued to supply significant
amounts of low-carbon baseload electricity,
despite strong competition from low-costfossil fuels and subsidised renewableenergy sources. Three new units wereconnected to the grid in 2016, in Korea,
Russia and the United States. In Japan, an
additional three reactors returned tooperation in 2016, bringing the total to five
under the new regulatory regime. Threereactors were officially shut down in 2016 –one in Japan, one in Russia and one in the
United States. Governments committed tohaving nuclear power in the energy mix
advanced plans for developing or increasing
nuclear generating capacity, with the
preparation of new build projects making
progress in Finland, Hungary, Turkey andthe United Kingdom. Further details onthese and other developments are provided
in the publication’s numerous tables, graphs
and country reports.

taintiesin Cost Estim ningfor Decommissio
ies
Nuclear Facilit

NEA

Addressing Uncertainties
in Cost Estimates for
Decommissioning
Nuclear Facilities

Wastel’énergie

Nuclear Energy Data 2017/
Données sur l’énergie
nucléaire 2017

Fuel and Radioactive

Nuclear Energy

Nuclear Energy Data
surDonnées nuclé
aire

Spent Nuclear

Nuclear Development
de l’énergie nucléaire
Développement
2017

NEA

National Inventories andManagement Strategies
for Spent Nuclear Fueland Radioactive Waste
Extended Methodology
for the Common
Presentation of Data
NEA No. 7371. 70 pages.

NEA No. 7344. 64 pages.

Available online at: http://oe.cd/2aM

Available online at:
http://oe.cd/2aL

Radioactive waste inventory data are an
important element in the development ofa national radioactive waste management
programme since these data affect thedesign and selection of the ultimate
disposal methods. Inventory data are
generally presented as an amountof radioactive waste under various
waste classes, according to the waste
classification scheme developed andadopted by the country or national
programme in question. Various waste
classification schemes have evolved inmost countries, and these schemes classify
radioactive waste according to its origin, tocriteria related to the protection of workers
or to the physical, chemical and radiologicalproperties of the waste and the planned
disposal method(s).

The cost estimation process of
decommissioning nuclear facilities has
continued to evolve in recent years, witha general trend towards demonstrating
greater levels of detail in the estimate andmore explicit consideration of uncertainties,
the latter of which may have an impact on
decommissioning project costs. The 2012
report on the International Structure for
Decommissioning Costing (ISDC) of Nuclear
Installations, a joint recommendation by
the Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA), theInternational Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
and the European Commission, proposesa standardised structure of cost items fordecommissioning projects that can be usedeither directly for the production of costestimates or for mapping of cost items
for benchmarking purposes. The ISDC,
however, provides only limited guidanceon the treatment of uncertainty when
preparing cost estimates. Addressing
Uncertainties in Cost Estimates for
Decommissioning Nuclear Facilities,
prepared jointly by the NEA and IAEA,
is intended to complement the ISDC,
assisting cost estimators and reviewers insystematically addressing uncertainties indecommissioning cost estimates. Basedon experiences gained in participating
countries and projects, the report describes
how uncertainty and risks can be analysed
and incorporated in decommissioning costestimates, while presenting the outcomesin a transparent manner.

The diversity in classification schemes
across countries has restricted thepossibility of comparing waste inventories
and led to difficulties in interpreting waste
management practices, both nationallyand internationally. To help improve thissituation, the Nuclear Energy Agency
developed a methodology that ensuresconsistency of national radioactive waste
and spent fuel inventory data whenpresenting them in a common scheme
in direct connection with accepted
management strategy and disposal routes.
This report is a follow-up to the 2016
report that introduced the methodology
and presenting scheme for spent fuel,and it now extends this methodology
and presenting scheme to all types ofradioactive waste and corresponding
management strategies.

27

NEA PUBLICATIONS AND BROCHURESRadioactive Waste
2017

Managementtion

cterisa
Radiological Charaand Materials
Radiologicalfrom a Waste
ctive
End-State Perspe

on from a Waste
Characterisati

Practices andExperienceand Materials

Radiological
Characterisation from a
Waste and Materials
End-State Perspective

End-State Perspective

Practices and Experience
NEA

NEA No. 7373. 96 pages.
Available online at: http://oe.cd/2aN
Radiological characterisation is a
key enabling activity for the planningand implementation of nuclear
facility decommissioning. Effective
characterisation allows the extent,
location and nature of contamination to be
determined and provides crucial information
for facility dismantling, the management ofmaterial and waste arisings, the protectionof workers, the public and the environment,
and associated cost estimations.
This report will be useful forcharacterisation practitioners who carry out
tactical planning, preparation, optimisationand implementation of characterisation to
support the decommissioning of nuclear
facilities and the management of associatedmaterials and waste. It compiles recent
experience from NEA member countries inradiological characterisation, including frominternational experts, international casestudies, an international conference, andinternational standards and guidance. Using
this comprehensive evidence base, thereport identifies relevant good practice andprovides practical advice covering all stagesof the characterisation process.
Radioactive Waste
2017

Management

g and Reuse
Recyclinials
Arisingof Matermissioning
from the Decom iesof Nuclear Facilit

NEA

Recycling and Reuse ofMaterials Arising fromthe Decommissioning of
Nuclear Facilities
NEA No. 7310. 68 pages.
Available online at:
http://oe.cd/2aO

Large quantities of materials arising fromthe decommissioning of nuclear facilities
are non-radioactive per se. An additional,
significant share of materials is of very
low-level or low-level radioactivity andcan, after having undergone treatment
and a clearance process, be recycled
and reused in a restricted or unrestricted
way. Recycle and reuse options today
provide valuable solutions to minimise
radioactive waste from decommissioning
and at the same time maximise therecovery of valuable materials. The
NEA Co-operative Programme on
Decommissioning (CPD) prepared thisoverview on the various approaches being
undertaken by international and nationalorganisations for the management ofslightly contaminated material resulting
from activities in the nuclear sector.

28 | NEA News 2018 – No. 35.2

The report draws on CPD member
organisations’ experiences and practices
related to recycling and reuse, which weregathered through an international survey. It
provides information on improvements andchanges in technologies, methodologies
and regulations since the 1996 report on
this subject, with the conclusions andrecommendations taking into account20 years of additional experience thatwill be useful for current and future
practitioners. Case studies are provided
to illustrate significant points of interest,for example in relation to scrap metals,
concrete and soil.

Radioactive Waste
2017

Managementtionalof Interna
Sourcebesook
Related to theActivitiof Safety Cases
Development ical Repositories
for Deep Geolog

NEA

Sourcebook ofInternational Activities
Related to theDevelopment of Safety
Cases for Deep
Geological Repositories
NEA No. 7341. 64 pages.

Available online at: http://oe.cd/2aP
All national radioactive waste management
authorities recognise today that a robust
safety case is essential in developing
disposal facilities for radioactive waste.
To improve the robustness of the safetycase for the development of a deep
geological repository, a wide variety ofactivities have been carried out by national
programmes and international organisations
over the past years. The Nuclear Energy
Agency, since first introducing the modern
concept of the “safety case”, has continued
to monitor major developments in safetycase activities at the international level.
This Sourcebook summarises the activities
being undertaken by the Nuclear Energy
Agency, the European Commission andthe International Atomic Energy Agency
concerning the safety case for theoperational and post-closure phases ofgeological repositories for radioactive wastethat ranges from low-level to high-level
waste and for spent fuel. In doing so, ithighlights important differences in focus
among the three organisations.

Nuclear science andthe Data Bank
Nuclear Science

International
SFCOMPO 2.0:
NuclearDatabase of Spent Data
Assay
Fuel Isotopic

NEA No. 7391
June 2017

NEA

SFCOMPO 2.0:
International Databaseof Spent Nuclear Fuel
Isotopic Assay Data
NEA No. 7391. DVD.

SFCOMPO 2.0 is the
NEA database of experimental assay
measurements. Measurements areisotopic concentrations from destructive
radiochemical analyses of spent nuclear
fuel (SNF) samples, supplemented withdesign information for the fuel rod andfuel assembly from which each sample
was taken, as well as with relevant
information on operating conditions anddesign characteristics of the host reactors.
SFCOMPO 2.0 contains data from750 SNF samples coming from 44 reactors
representing 8 different international reactor
designs. SFCOMPO 2.0 was released
online in June 2017.
SFCOMPO 2.0 has been developed by
the NEA in close collaboration with Oak
Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL). The
data in SFCOMPO 2.0 has undergone
an independent and iterative review
process by the Expert Group on Assay
Data of Spent Nuclear Fuel (EGADSNF),
under the NEA Working Party on Nuclear
Criticality Safety (WPNCS). The data
have been reviewed for consistency
with the experimental reports but havenot been formally evaluated. Assay data
evaluations are a multidisciplinary effort
involving reactor specialists, modelling andsimulation experts, and radiochemistry
experts. Any errors in measurements,
omissions or inconsistencies in the originalreported data may be reproduced in the
database. Therefore, it is important that any
user of the data for code validation consider
and assess the potential data deficiencies.
The evaluation of assay data will provide
a more complete assessment and may
result in the development of benchmark
specifications and measurement data incases of high quality experiments.
SFCOMPO 2.0 contains only openly
accessible, published experimental
assay data. An online Java application of
SFCOMPO 2.0 is available at:www.oecd-nea.org/sfcompo.

Nuclear law

Nuclear safety andregulation

Nuclear Law Bulletin,
Volume No. 99

Legal Affairs
2017

Nuclear Law Bulletin
No. 99State-of-the-Art Reporton Molten Corium
Concrete Interaction and
Ex-Vessel Molten Core
Coolability

Nuclear Safety
2017
NEA
2017

NEA No. 7366. 120 pages.

Volume 2017/1

CoriumReport on Molten
tate-of-the-Art ion and Ex-Vessel Molten
Concrete Interact
ityCore Coolabilmeltinteractions andS

relation to core-concrete increased the level ofthree decades in
the residual
out over the lastmodes, have significantlyof the reactor core,
Activities carried as related containment failure
little or no cooling challenges in such cases is tocoolability, as well area. In a severe accident withthethis
to melt. One ofpressure vessel.
understanding in
the core materials causing a failure of the reactor
betweenfuel can causematerials
the vessel. The reaction extensive
decay heat in theof molten coreconcrete below
beinteraction), candetermine the consequencesfor example, with structuralinteract,(molten core concrete through sprays or flooding
Molten corium will commonly referred to as MCCIof ex-vessel melts
coolability, andcorium and concrete,
The cooling behaviour of the art on MCCI and melt
to modelcombustible gases.
the current stateof severe accidents,
and can release
the consequences
This report summarises
seeking to predictis also complex.
of mitigation measures.
useful to specialists
and to designers
thus should becomputer codesdevelopers for severe-accident

on Molten
Ex-Vessel
Interaction and
Coolability
Molten Core

State-of-the-Art
Report on Molten
Corium Concrete

NEA

Available online at:
http://oe.cd/2aQt

rt ReporState-of-the-A
ete
Corium Concr

Core Coolabilitys

Feature articles in this issue include:“Reformed and reforming: Adapting thelicensing process to meet new challenges”;“Reflections on the development ofinternational nuclear law”; and “Facing thechallenge of nuclear mass tort processing”.

Ex-Vessel Molten

Agency (NEA)
Nuclear Energy
Le Gallo
46, quai Alphonse, France
92100 Boulogne-Billancourt
45 24 10 15
Tel.: +33 (0)1
www.oecd-nea.org
nea@oecd-nea.org

Interaction and

The Nuclear Law Bulletin
is a unique international publication forboth professionals and academics in thefield of nuclear law. It provides readerswith authoritative and comprehensive
information on nuclear law developments.
Published free online twice a year in both
English and French, it features topicalarticles written by renowned legal experts,
covers legislative developments worldwide
and reports on relevant case law, bilateraland international agreements as well
as regulatory activities of internationalorganisations.

NEA No. 7392

NEA

Publication of
NEA-serviced bodies
AL DESIGNMULTINATIONRAMMEEVALUATION PROG
Annual Reportpril 2017
April 2016-A
August 2017

Multinational Design
Evaluation Programme(MDEP) Annual Report:
April 2016-April 2017
MDEP report. 58 pages.

NEA No. 7392. 365 pages.

Available online at: http://oe.cd/2aR
Activities carried out over the last three
decades in relation to core-concreteinteractions and melt coolability, as well
as related containment failure modes,
have significantly increased the level ofunderstanding in this area. In a severe
accident with little or no cooling of thereactor core, the residual decay heat in thefuel can cause the core materials to melt.
One of the challenges in such cases is todetermine the consequences of molten
core materials causing a failure of thereactor pressure vessel. Molten corium
will interact, for example, with structuralconcrete below the vessel. The reaction
between corium and concrete, commonlyreferred to as MCCI (molten core concreteinteraction), can be extensive and canrelease combustible gases. The coolingbehaviour of ex-vessel melts throughsprays or flooding is also complex. This
report summarises the current state of theart on MCCI and melt coolability, and thus
should be useful to specialists seeking
to predict the consequences of severe
accidents, to model developers for severeaccident computer codes and to designersof mitigation measures.

Visit our website at:www.oecd-nea.org
You can also visit us on Facebook at: www.facebook.com/OECDNuclearEnergyAgency
and follow us on Twitter @OECD_NEA

29

FROM THE AMERICAN NUCLEAR SOCIETY (ANS)

30 | NEA News 2018 – No. 35.2

The Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) is an intergovernmental agency established in 1958.
Its primary objective is to assist its member countries in maintaining and further developing, through international
co-operation, the scientific, technological and legal bases required for a safe, environmentally sound and economicaluse of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. It is a non-partisan, unbiased source of information,
data and analyses, drawing on one of the best international networks of technical experts.
The NEA has 33 member countries: Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, the Czech Republic,
Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Korea, Luxembourg,
Mexico, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, the Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain,
Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States. The NEA co-operates with a range ofmultilateral organisations including the European Commission and the International Atomic Energy Agency.

NEA News is published twice yearly. The opi­nions expressed herein are those of the contributors
and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Agency or of its member countries.
The material in NEA News may be freely used provided the source is acknowledged.

All correspondence should be addressed to:
The Editor, NEA News – OECD/NEA – 2, rue André-Pascal – 75775 Paris Cedex 16, France
Tel.: +33 (0)1 45 24 10 12 – Fax: +33 (0)1 45 24 11 10

For more information about the NEA, see: www.oecd-nea.org
Editor: Janice Griffiths
Design and layout: Fabienne Vuillaume
Editorial assistant: Rhiann Pask
Production assistants: Andrée Pham Van, Laurie Moore

OECD/NEA Publishing, 2 rue André-Pascal, 75775 PARIS CEDEX 16
PRINTED IN FRANCE

Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA)
46, quai Alphonse Le Gallo
92100 Boulogne-Billancourt, France
Tel.: +33 (0)1 45 24 10 15
nea@oecd-nea.org www.oecd-nea.org

NEA No. 7348