COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
COM(93) 88 final 
Brussels, 1 Apr iI 1993 
COMMUNICATION AND THIRD REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION 
on the present situation and prospects for radioactive 
waste management in the European Community 
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION 
on the present situation and prospects for radioactive 
waste management in the European Community 
/. INTRODUCTION 
II. PRESENT SITUATION AND PROSPECTS OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE 
MANAGEMENT 
HA. Waste generation 
II.B. Management of short lived waste 
U.C. State of deep disposal 
II.D. Achievements and unsolved questions 
III. COMMISSION ACTION 
IV. RECOMMENDATIONS 
INTRODUCTION 
In its resolution of February, the 18th, 19801, the Council approved a Community 
Action Plan for 1980-1992 in the field of radioactive waste. This plan deals with 
problems due to radioactive waste from nuclear facilities and more especially 
those concerning management and disposal of high level and/or long-lived waste. 
Under Point 1, the plan provides for continuous analysis of the situation regarding 
radioactive waste management in the Community with a view to adopting the 
necessary solutions. This analysis must deal with: 
the available techniques, the existing facilities and those planned by the 
Member States in order to ensure the different stages of radioactive waste 
management which include the processes and procedures enabling final 
disposal; 
the research and technological development works planned by the Member 
States and the Community; 
the management practices of the different waste types in the Member 
States, defined or to be defined; 
the implementation previsions and their timetable. 
Information and results obtained during these studies must be exploited "with a 
view to continuously provide the Community and the Member States with an 
inventory of results and achievements in the field of radioactive waste 
management and storage, taking into consideration the needs of nuclear 
programmes". 
The Commission forwarded to the Council in 1983 and 19872 two reports 
concerning the situation and the prospects for nuclear waste management in the 
Community Member States until the end of the century. 
The Commission forwards as appendix its third report based on the 1990-1991 
situation and compiled as were the previous ones from information provided by 
the Member States. 
The Council has recently approved the renewal of the Plan3 for the period 1993-
1999. This renewal should in particular allow the Commission to continue 
periodically to inform the Council by other reports. 
see O.J. N°C51/1-2-3 of 29.021980 
Communications from the Commission to the Council "First report on present situation and outlook 
for radioactive waste management in the Community", doc. COM (83) 262 of 16.05.1983 and "Second 
report", doc. COM (87) 312 of 29.07.1987. 
Council Resolution of 15.06.1992 
//- PRESENT SITUATION AND PROSPECTS OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE 
MANAGEMENT 
The report appended outlines the following points: 
HA. Waste generation 
The high level of development of the Member States implies the production of 
many different types of radioactive waste with various origins in the Community; 
the amount of waste generation varies considerably from one Community State 
to the other; however every State is concerned by this problem. 
The first production source is the use of radioisotopes and some irradiation 
devices in industry, medicine and non nuclear research. It exists in all 
Member States. This waste is low level with the exception of used radiation 
sources. Although the national data concerning this waste are difficult to 
compare, it appears that the volumes involved cannot be neglected and 
require careful management. 
The second production source is the processing of ores or raw materials 
containing naturally occurring radionuclides by various industries; it exists 
in States with or without nuclear power programmes, which have industrial 
activities such as uranium mining and milling , phosphate fertilizer 
production and oil and gas extraction; this waste contains only natural 
radionuclides and is mainly only slightly radioactive. With the exception of 
those dealing with the uranium mine working, the data concerning this last 
waste type are not systematically available. 
The development of nuclear power programmes including the associated 
research and the decommissioning of obsolete facilities represents the third 
production source4. The waste arising from nuclear power stations and 
from associated fuel cycle installations represents the main part in terms 
of radioactivity contained. This waste belongs to all types (low, 
intermediate and high activity; short-and long-lived). It exists in Member 
States which are, or have been, involved with nuclear power programmes. 
In terms of volume, the annual production of this waste is in line with the 
previsions of the previous report and should remain more or less constant 
during the decade, depending on various factors (evolution of national 
nuclear programmes, technological progress in the field of waste 
processing, management optimisation, etc). 
Although the report covers the period 1990-2020, the estimates beyond 2000 are 
highly speculative, taking into account the uncertainties related to the national 
policies as far as nuclear plant building and dismantling are concerned. 
Military wastes do not come within the scope of this report. 
I LB. Management of short lived waste 
Management and disposal of low and medium level activity (short-lived) waste, 
which represent 90% of the volume produced in the nuclear power industry, 
benefit from effective and well-tested technical solutions. 
The processing methods clearly satisfy, in general, the present needs of industry 
and the requirements of the Community safety authorities; although these 
operations have been carried out for several decades, they continuously benefit 
from technological progress and management optimisation, in particular with 
regard to the reduction of generated waste volumes and of radioactive releases 
into the environment. 
Near-surface disposal in engineered structures is most particularly developed and 
is increasingly practised in the Community for this waste type5. The capabilities 
of the national facilities recently brought into operation should accommodate the 
needs of the Member States concerned until about 2020/2030. 
The other Member States' needs should be covered by an alternative option, 
disposal in deep repositories (see Section C below), which is being carried out or 
waiting for operation license, or long term storage (case for one Member State). 
U.C. State of deep disposal 
There is no doubt that deep disposal6 of all types of radioactive waste is 
technically feasible and safe in principle after two decades of research 
programmes, development and demonstration at international, Community and 
national levels. Methods exist to estimate its safety as a function of the sites 
considered. 
This kind of disposal has so far never been practised for the waste types, for 
which it is imperative, i.e. for long-lived waste: intermediate level waste 
contaminated by alpha emitters or high activity waste7 producing heat by 
radioactive decay. This situation is not peculiar to the Community. It is not 
worrying from the radiation protection point of view since these waste types can 
be safely stored temporarily in appropriate facilities. 
As far as high level waste is concerned, it is indeed advisable to let it "cool down" 
during a few decades for technical and safety reasons. Moreover, solutions and 
long term storage facilities exist or are being developed. 
This situation is, on the other hand, unfortunate for alpha emitter contaminated 
waste, which does not present "cooling" requirements and has a volume to be 
stored which is becoming substantial - 8% of the total volume of generated waste 
per year. The projects in progress in some Member States then take on a greater 
importance. 
5 About 1,400,000 m3 have already been disposed of, embedding materials and packages included. 
Also named "geological" disposal 
Vitrified waste generated during reprocessing of spent fuel or spent fuel itself when it is not planned to 
reprocess it. /\ 
H.D. Achievements and unsolved questions 
Generally speaking, the safety of management of radioactive waste produced by 
the nuclear industry and the reduction of its impact on the environment appear 
to have significantly progressed during the last few years owing to the combination 
of technological progress, high effective investment, management improvement, 
structures put into position in the various Member States and to improving 
statutory regulations. 
Waste coming from hospitals, industry and research laboratories is dealt with by 
efforts aiming at maintaining and improving its production and management 
control. 
Some questions of a statutory or strategic nature still remain to be resolved and 
deserve a special attention, in particular the management of very slightly 
radioactive materials of various origins, the equivalence between radioactive waste 
coming from different sources and public information and consultation. 
///- COMMISSION ACTION 
From the report attached to this communication, Commission action seems to 
have responded well to the Community's needs in the scope of R&D both in the 
field of regulations and in providing incentives to cooperation and harmonization 
between the Member States. 
In the scope of R&D, the 1985-1989 programme has been carried through8 
and the 1990-1994 programme is being carried out with the support of the 
Advisory Management and Coordination Comittee. 
In the field of regulation, the measures taken to avoid uncontrolled 
transfers of radioactive waste from one country to the other have to be 
particularly noted9. Likewise, the Community has prohibited all direct and 
indirect export of hazardous waste and radioactive waste to the 68 ACP 
States10 
In the field of cooperation and harmonization, the still wider opening of 
national underground disposal experimental facilities to scientific teams 
from other member countries and the development of a Community 
laboratory network aiming at optimizing and harmonizing the quality 
control of waste packages are two outstanding examples. 
See evaluation of Community Research in the field of Radioactive Waste Management and Storage 
(1985-1989) - EUR report N°12264 EN. 
Council Directive of February 3, 1992 on the supervision and control of shipments of radioactive waste 
between Member States and into and out of the Community - O.J. L35 - 12/02/92 p. 24. 
According to the article 39 of the fourth ACP-CEE Convention, signed in Lomé on 15 December 1989 
In order to follow up the commitments made in the Community 5th action 
programme on the environment, the Commission intends to come forward 
shortly with a Community strategy on radioactive waste. This would 
complement the Community strategy on waste (which excludes radioactive 
waste) set out in the Council resolution of 7 May 1990. 
IV- RECOMMENDATIONS 
According to the analysis carried out in the attached report and summarized in 
Section II above, the Commission draws the attention of the Council to the 
following points: 
radioactive waste management is an important element as far as safety and 
environment protection are concerned; it must be developed and 
structured for all waste, whatever the origin of its production, in order to 
ensure the respect of safety and radiological protection requirements; 
the study, the choice and the opening of disposal sites are priorities and 
must be continued; 
the efforts of technological development and optimization must be carried 
on, in particular in the field of management of waste containing long lived 
radionuclides (e.g. volume reduction, waste decontamination and reduction 
of long term radiotoxicity). 
radioactive waste management and particularly its final stage, disposal, 
requires intensive public information and consultation. 
\S 
THIRD REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION 
on the present situation and prospects for radioactive 
waste management in the European Community 
'9 
TABUB OF CONTENTS 
Preface 
I Waste management in perspective 
II Radioactive waste arisings in the EC countries 
II. 1 Sources of radioactive waste production 
11.2 Radioactive waste categories 
11.3 Radioactive waste arisings 
11.3.1 Radioactive waste arising from use of isotopes in industry, medicine and 
from general research 
11.3.2 Waste resulting from the processing of raw materials containing natural 
radionuclides 
11.3.3 Waste arising from nuclear power programmes 
m Present situation and prospects of the radioactive waste management practices 
and policies in the Community 
111.1 Organisation and structure of radioactive waste management in the EC countries 
111.2 Research and development programmes 
111.2.1 Programmes and budgets 
111.2.2 Advanced Research/Transmutation 
111.3 System approach and principles 
111.4 Treatment and conditioning 
111.5 Transport of radioactive waste 
111.5.1 Provisions governing the transport of nuclear materials in general 
111.5.2 Transport of radioactive waste in practice 
111.6 Storage and disposal of radioactive waste and spent fuel 
111.6.1 Introduction 
111.6.2 Interim storage 
111.6.2.1 Low and medium level radioactive waste packages 
111.6.2.2 Vitrified high level waste 
111.6.2.3 Spent fuel 
111.6.3 Disposal of radioactive waste 
III.6.3.1 Near surface disposal sites 
IIL6.3.2 Deep repositories 
IV Nuclear safety in radioactive waste management 
IV. 1 Prédisposai activities 
IV.2 Disposal 
IV.2.1 Near surface disposal 
IV.2.2 Deep disposal in geological formations 
V Ongoing regulatory and policy issues 
V.l Materials presenting a very low radioactivity 
V.2 Radioactive waste equivalence 
V.3 Public information and involvement 
ABBREVIATIONS 
AEA Atomic Energy Authority 
ANDRA Agence Nationale pour la gestion des Déchets RAdioactifs 
BfS Bundesamt fur Strahlenschutz 
BNFL British Nuclear Fuels pic 
CEA Commissariat à l'Energie Atomique 
CEC Commission of the European Communities 
CEN/SCK Centre d'Etude de l'énergie Nucléaire/Studie Centrum voor Kemenergie 
CIEMAT Centro de Investigaciones Energeticas, Medio Ambientales y Technologicas 
COVRA Centrale Organisatie Voor Radioactief Afval 
DBE Deutsche Gesellschaft zum Bau und Betriebe von Endlagern fur 
Abfallstoffe 
EC European Community 
ENEA Ente per le Nuove technologie, l'Energia e l'Ambiente 
ENEL Ente Nazionale dell'Energia ELettrica 
ENRESA Empresa Nacional de RESiduos rAdioactivos 
HLW High Level Waste 
IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency 
LLW Low Level Waste 
MLW Medium Level Waste 
NE Nuclear Electric 
NEA Nuclear Energy Agency 
NIREX Nuclear Industry Radioactive waste Executive 
NUCLECO NUCIxare-ECOlogia 
ONDRAF/ Organisme National des Déchets Radioactifs et des matières 
NIRAS Fissiles/Nationale Installing voor het Beheer van Radioactief Afval en 
Splijstoffen 
OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 
OPLA OPslag op LAnd 
SN Southern Network 
WAK WiederaufArbeitungsanlage Karlsruhe 
WHO World Health Organisation 
PREFACE 
The Community Plan of Action in the field of radioactive waste for 1980-92, approved 
by the Council of Ministers of the European Communities in February 1980L), 
provides under point 1 for continuous analysis by the Commission of the situation 
regarding radioactive waste management in the Community. 
To enable the Community and the Member States to make use of the results of such 
an analysis, the Commission periodically reports to the Council of Ministers. 
Reports were forwarded to the Council in 1983 and 198720. The present report is 
thus the third of its kind; it updates and supplements the information presented in the 
previous reports and for the first time provides information on the situation in the new 
States ("Lander") of the Federal Republic of Germany. The evaluation of radioactive 
waste arising in the Community has tentatively been extended up to 2020. 
The present report is based on information from national sources supphed by Member 
States' delegates on the Commission's Advisory Committee for the Community Plan 
of Action in the field of radioactive waste. 
General background information on radioactive waste has been set out in the previous 
reports, to which the reader will hence have to refer when the need arises. 
1.) Council Resolution of 18 February 1980, OJ. No C 51, 29.2.1980, p. 1 
2.) Communications from the Commission to the Council of Ministers of the European Communities, Doc. COM 
(83) 262 of 16 May 1983 "Analysis of the present situation and prospects in the field of radioactive waste 
management in the Community" and Doc. COM (87) 312 of 29 July 1987, idem. 
CHAPTERI 
WASTE MANAGEMENT IN PERSPECTIVE 
During the last decade the management of waste of any kind (domestic, industrial 
toxic and non toxic, nuclear) has been the subject of increased attention and concern 
in the European Community. 
As far as domestic and industrial wastes are concerned, first estimates of arisings have 
been produced at national and Community levels. The annual production of solid 
waste (all categories together) is roughly of 2,200 million tons for the Community as 
a whole of which 20 million tons are industrial toxic waste. Provisional lists are being 
made of the harmful products which may be contained in these wastes and broad 
categories are being set up with a view to make easier the safe management and 
disposal of these wastes. Disposal options for toxic waste, mainly underground, are 
being reviewed in some countries, like the Federal Republic of Germany, as well as 
appropriate waste forms, according to the "system approach" already developed for 
nuclear waste (see Chapter III). 
In parallel, the regulatory framework is being strongly developed at national and 
Community levels, notably the relevant EC legislation. 
An EC waste strategy has been adopted at the end of 1989. In addition, appropriate 
national structures for this type of waste, have been recently created in several 
Member States. 
As far as radioactive waste is concerned, estimates of past and future production 
according to categories have been made country by country and for the European 
Community as a whole. In the latter case an annual arising amounts to approximately 
80,000 m3, out of which some 150 m3 are highly radioactive. Practices and trends in 
waste processing and disposal, national management strategies, regulatory 
developments and national structures (i.e. national agencies, waste operators, safety 
authorities) have been the subject of Commission's reports to the Council of Ministers 
in 1983 and 1987. In addition, since 1980, the Community Plan of Action in the field 
of radioactive waste has provided a suitable framework for concerting the national 
policies and regulatories practices in the field of waste management. 
Since then, an increased awareness of the plant operators and the public has 
developed worldwide about additional aspects of radioactive management, like: 
the need for waste minimisation, in terms of volume, radioactivity and chemical 
toxicity, which calls for an optimal management procedure; 
the rules for the transport and international transfer of radioactive waste; 
the recycling and disposal of waste resulting from the dismantling of old nuclear 
facilities; today more than hundred major nuclear installations have been closed 
all over the world; this number will increase with the aging of existing plants; 
the management and disposal of radioactive waste arising outside the nuclear 
fuel cycle and resulting from research, industrial and medical activities involving 
the use of radionuclides; 
the restoration of sites used in the early years of nuclear energy; 
The conditions of radioactive waste disposal and its acceptance by the public remains 
however today a major question in the EC and elsewhere. 
The EC Commission is giving due attention to these questions by means of its research 
programmes and of its regulatory activities as defined in Chapter III "Health and 
Safety" of the Euratom Treaty. A directive on radioactive waste transfers has just 
been adopted by the Council of Ministers. The Council also recently drew 
conclusions30 on future priorities, notably as far as the establishment of common 
principles for the siting of disposal facilities is concerned. 
The present report, like the two previous ones, deals with the overall situation in the 
EC Member States; it updates the information given in the previous reports and 
complements it with the questions mentioned above. 
3.) Press release of December 18, 1990, N° 10871-90 - press 232 
CHAPTERn 
RADIOACTIVE WASTE ARISINGS 
IN THE EC COUNTRIES 
ILL SOURCES OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE PRODUCTION 
Three types of activity which generate radioactive waste can be considered 
within the European Community40: 
utilisation of radioisotopes and certain types of irradiation in industry, 
medicine and research; 
processing by various industries of raw materials containing natural 
radionuclides; 
nuclear power programmes, including related research and the 
decommissioning of obsolete plants. 
The relative importance of these sources considerably varies from one 
Community country to another one; all Community countries commonly use 
radionuclides for research, industrial and medical purposes. Those countries 
with nuclear power programmes generate most of the radioactivity contained 
in the waste and the greatest part of the radioactive waste arising in the 
Community as a whole. A few countries having or not having a nuclear energy 
programme, are operating uranium mines and mills which generate large 
volumes of slightly radioactive materials, containing natural radionuclides. 
For several years, it has also been recognised that other industrial activities may 
generate similar materials. This is the case in industrial activities where raw 
materials containing natural occurring radionuclides at low concentrations are 
processed on a large scale, such as the production of artificial phosphate 
fertilizers and the extraction of oil and gas. In these processes, the natural 
radionuclides present in the raw material are concentrated either in the 
products or in the different waste streams. Today an overview of amounts, 
compositions, radioactivity levels, etc, of these wastes is however not 
available50 
EL2. RADIOACTIVE WASTE CATEGORIES 
Radioactive waste comprises a great variety of materials. These materials can 
have different physical/chemical forms, can emit several types of radiation*0 
4.) Military activities do not come within the scope of this report. 
5.) The report EUR 13262 EN, 1991 "Study of the radionuclides contained in waste produced by the phosphate 
industry and their impact on the environment" gives datas concerning a specific case. See also section V.l. of 
this report for the related safety aspects. 
6.) Mainly alpha, beta and gamma radiations 
8 
and can contain widely different amounts of radioactivity. 
Clearly, this diversity results in widely differing potential hazards and therefore 
necessitates different types of management. Radioactive waste must hence be 
classified by categories. The classification described below has already been 
used in the previous reports (1983 and 1987) and was chosen because it is the 
best way of presenting, in the case of the Community, quantitative data on 
treated and conditioned radioactive waste produced in the Member States. 
It also possesses the advantage of grouping the radioactive waste into 
categories which correspond to a certain extent to the disposal options applied 
at present or contemplated in the Member States (see Chapter III). 
Four main waste categories are distinguished: 
low level waste, 
medium level waste, 
alpha waste, 
high level waste from reprocessing and spent fuel (if declared as a 
waste). 
These categories, and the inclusion of a "type" of waste in one category rather 
than in another one, are not of a regulatory or normative nature. Moreover, 
the management practices in some Member States may be such that categories 
or types of waste identical to those considered in this report may not exist at 
national level. 
(a) The low level waste category covers waste (mainly technological 7°) 
containing or suspected of containing beta-gamma emitters and mainly 
naturally occurring alpha emitters in low concentrations (and therefore 
of low activity) produced by research centres and arising from industrial 
and medical uses of radionuclides and from the operations conducted 
in various installations involved in the nuclear fuel cycle. The 
concentration of the other alpha emitters (plutonium, americium, etc.) 
in this waste category is very low and is very strictly monitored. The 
radioactivity of such wastes becomes negligible through natural decay 
after several centuries at most. The waste produces only negligible 
amounts of heat. 
(b) The medium level waste category^comprises waste containing mainly 
beta-gamma emitters in relatively high concentrations. This waste 
originateSjfor the most part, from operation of nuclear power plants 
(ion-exchange resins, filter cartridges, evaporator concentrates,...). The 
7.) Technological wastes are generated during maintenance operations. 
8.) In the Federal Republic of Germany, medium level waste and alpha waste which produce only negligible 
amounts of heat are combined with waste in the low level category in view of the fact that deep-lying geological 
formations will be used for the disposal of all categories of waste. 
alpha emitters concentration in waste of this category is extremely low, 
as in the case of low level waste. Only negligible amounts of heat are 
generated. 
(c) The waste in the alpha waste category90 comprises technological and 
process wastes from nuclear laboratories conducting research on 
transuranics, plants fabricating uranium/plutonium mixed-oxide fuel 
elements and spent fuel reprocessing plants. Some of this waste is low 
level waste containing only alpha emitters. The remainder is medium 
level waste containing alpha, beta and gamma emitters which arises at 
reprocessing plants and includes hulls, caps and fines from fuel 
elements. The radioactivity in such wastes persists for very long periods 
because long-lived alpha emitters are present. Only small amounts of 
heat are generated. 
(d) The high level waste categoryia) comprises, for the purposes of this 
report, mainly vitrified waste containing the "ashes" arising from nuclear 
combustion (fission products and minor actinides which are alpha and 
beta-gamma emitters). These ashes are separated from the unburnt 
nuclear fuel (uranium and plutonium) in radiochemical installations 
(reprocessing plants) which treat the spent fuel discharged from the 
nuclear power plants. Such a waste contains the greatest part of the 
radioactivity; it remains dangerous for very long periods and emits an 
appreciable amount of heat for several centuries. 
(e) If the decision is taken not to undertake reprocessing of the spent fuel 
discharged from the nuclear power plants, it is declared to be waste and 
constitutes a category separate and distinct from high level waste. The 
spent fuel from the THTR reactor110 in the Federal Republic of 
Germany and that from the light water reactors in Spain are examples 
of such wastes. 
Some very low level waste may be exempted from regulatory control by the 
competent authorities, and therefore should not be considered any more as 
radioactive waste. This question will be looked into in chapter V. 
Discharges of liquid and gaseous effluents into surface waters and the 
atmosphere - which take place with due regard to the radiation protection 
regulations in force and are adequately monitored - are communicated to the 
Commission of the European Communities and form the subject of periodic 
Commission reports; they are not dealt with in this report. 
9.) Idem 8.) 
10.) In the Federal Republic of Germany, this category is defined as a waste producing a significant amount of heat. 
11.) THTR: Thorium Hochtemperaturreaktor in Hamm/Uentrop 
10 
EL3. RADIOACTIVE WASTE ARISINGS 
The estimates refer to radioactive waste treated and conditioned as appropriate 
by means of current methods. 
IL3.1. Radioactive waste arising from use of isotopes in industry, medicine and from 
general research 
It should be pointed out that this question is of relevance to all the Community 
Member States. The production of this waste and its growth is not governed 
by electro-nuclear power programmes, but by the state and rate of industrial, 
economic and social development of the countries under concern and by their 
population number and future growth. 
These wastes are generally of the low level type and very short lived. 
Exceptions are spent sealed radiation sources, some of which can be highly 
active and long-lived. The potential danger of such sources, in case of 
mismanagement, should not be underestimated as shown by the accident which 
occurred at Goiania (Brazil) in 1987. Approximately 200 persons were 
irradiated. 
Measures have been taken at national level and efforts continue to maintain 
and improve control on production and management. 
Illustrative estimates of the waste volumes shipped annually to the collecting 
agencies for interim storage are given in Table I. 
As a result of differences occurring in the management routes being practised 
before interim storage (e.g. in matter of waste tracking, decaying, treatment 
and conditioning), these datas are not easily comparable from one country to 
another one. In spite of this fact, an average figure of 10-15 m3 per million 
inhabitants per annum may be deduced. 
H3.2. Waste resulting from the processing of raw materials containing natural 
radionuclides 
Uranium milling activities produce a special category of waste materials called 
tailings, containing very low concentrations of natural radionuclides some of 
which are long-lived. Uranium mining and milling in the EC are relatively 
modest and limited to France, Spain, Portugal and the Federal Republic of 
Germany. 
Uranium ores in the mentioned countries are generally low grade. The recovery 
of uranium is based on hydrometallurgical extraction. Due to the low uranium 
content, mill tailings contain more than 99% of the treated ore mass and retain 
75 - 80% of the natural radioactivity present in the ore in form of radioisotopes 
from the decay chain of uranium 238. One of the natural radionuclides 
associated with these tailings is radon gas (Radon 222). Tailings retain also a 
fraction of the chemical agents (e.g.residual acidity) used in the extraction 
process. 
11 
If uranium extraction is performed by heap leaching (lower grade ores), the 
depleted ore piles remain in place. For this reason the ground on which the 
piles are built is previously rendered impermeable, in order to achieve a good 
leaching yield and to prevent later on uncontrolled leaks of contaminated water 
into the ground. 
Tailings from dynamic leaching (higher grade ores) are disposed of, together 
with slurries from the neutralisation or treatment of liquid plant effluents, in 
especially conditioned piles or dykes, in order to reduce the radiological risk to 
man and environment. 
In the case of tailings left from older milling operations, remedial actions may 
have to be undertaken. The operations may vary considerably, depending on 
the specific conditions of the site. 
As in any other mining activity, and especially in open pit mining, the disposal 
and conditioning of mill tailings is a part of an integrated process of 
rehabilitation of the site, tending to restore or recover the original landscape. 
Liquid effluents are kept to a minimum through recirculation and before their 
controlled releases, subject to treatment consisting in neutralisation, 
precipitation and natural evaporation. 
The amount of uranium milling waste produced until the end of 1990 is as 
follows : 
Slurries (tailings) Heap leach (depleted) 
(10* t) (ltft) 
Federal Republic of 
Germany 54.00 
France 30.49* 18.05 
Portugal 2.38 0.04 
Spain 1.75 6.20 
* Humid Weigftt; dry weight is 27.72 
II.3.3. Waste arising from nuclear power programmes 
The production of radioactive waste associated with nuclear power programmes 
(including directly related research) is roughly proportional to the scale of those 
programmes. However, it also depends on the typeR) and situation (in 
12.) As an example, the GGR (Gas-Graphite Reactor) type and its associated fuel cycle installations (reprocessing 
plants, etc.) which is not developed anymore but which is still part of the United Kingdom programme, produce 
almost four times as much waste per unit as the LWR reactor type with its fuel cycle installations. 
12 
operation, shut down, under dismantling) of the nuclear installations involved 
in each programme. 
Several Community countries have installed nuclear power plants of various 
types since the late 1950s. The installed nuclear power capacity in the 
Community gradually rose to reach about 111.8 GWe in 1990 (1.8 GWe due 
to the addition of East German plants). This figure has to be compared with 
the end of 1985 figure of 77.5 GWe used for waste arising estimates in the 1987 
report. Most of this increase is due to new French and German plants, and to 
a smaller degree, to new British and Spanish plants. Italian power plants 
stopped operation in 1987. A definitive shut down was decided in July 1990. 
a. Radioactive waste from nuclear power programmes produced before 1991 
This waste is either awaiting conditioning or has been conditioned and stored 
in a monitored interim storage facility, or has already been definitely disposed 
of. 
Interim storage 
Part of the existing low and medium level waste is in interim storage (see 
table II) either because no disposal facility has been provided up to now in 
the countries of concern (Belgium, Federal Republic of Germany, Italy, 
Spain) or because interim storage is the country's present policy 
(The Netherlands) or because it represents a normal buffer in the 
management of existing disposal facilities (France, United Kingdom). All 
alpha waste, high level waste, and unreprocessed spent fuel are in interim 
storage. 
Disposed 
Low and medium level wastes (see Table III) have been disposed in the past 
by: 
- sea dumping (many countries, up to the setting up of a moratorium within 
the framework of the London International Convention on the prevention 
of marine pollution in 1983); 
deep disposal (Federal Republic of Germany, up to 1978); 
near surface disposal (France, United Kingdom)130 
Near surface disposal has been subject to great improvements140 and is 
being pursued by France at the "Centre de la Manche" and "Centre de 
l'Aube" and by the United Kingdom at Drigg. 464,500 m3 of low and medium 
level waste have been disposed up to now at the "Centre de La Manche" 
13.) For details, sec 2nd report COM (87) 312 of 1987 
14.) Sec chapter III.6.3.1 
13 
and 775,000 m3 of low level waste at Drigg15*. In addition 14,000 m3 of low 
level waste have been disposed at Dounreay (United Kingdom). 
The former Democratic Republic of Germany disposed of 14,300 m3 of 
mostly low level radioactive waste (part of them being liquid waste 
disposed of by in situ solidification) in the salt mine of Morsleben and of 
5,800 encapsulated radioactive sources from 1978 till 1990. Since then, 
upon request of the competent safety authority ("Bundesamt fur 
Strahlenschutz"), liquid waste, unconditioned combustible waste and 
radioactive sources have not been disposed of anymore. 
A safety analysis of the Morsleben facility is currently being carried out. 
Since February 1991, the local authorities have decided to suspend the 
disposal of the waste, taking into account legal objections. 
No alpha waste, high level waste, or spent fuel has been disposed of up to 
now within the European Community. 
b. Future radioactive waste arising from nuclear power programmes 
As regard the future of nuclear power (table IV), estimates possess in most 
cases a satisfactory degree of accuracy for the very short term only. It is 
therefore not possible to give a firm estimate of the installed nuclear capacity 
for the European Community as a whole in 2000, and, a fortiori, in 2020. 
The reason is mainly political uncertainties concerning the long term share 
of nuclear energy in each national energy balance. 
Due to this situation and for the sake of homogeneity, radioactive waste 
estimates given in the present report for the European Community as a 
whole refer to waste produced by existing nuclear plants1*0 (shut down or 
in operation) or committed. This may lead to unrealistic figures at national 
level. This is the case for France, where the working group for the Energy 
Plan forecasts the addition of new nuclear power plants during the period 
2000-2020 (see Table IV, footnote 7). 
Nuclear power estimates in table IV are therefore leading to a level of waste 
production which could only be decreased by unexpected major political 
decisions on national energy policies on the one hand, and by the 
technological and management progresses expected to result from research 
and development work and from experience on the other hand. 
The estimates relating to each Member State have been divided among the 
four waste categories described in section II.2 and are presented, 
accumulated per five-year or ten-year periods, in tables V, VI, VII and VIII 
for low level, medium level, alpha and high level wastes, respectively. 
The global evolution of the waste arising in the future is resulting from a 
combination of various causes, sometimes contradictory in their effects : 
15.) 1986 figures were 278,000 rrr* for La Manche and 630,000 nr5 for Drigg. 
16.)Power plants and the associated fuel cycle installations. 
14 
- The production of electricity of nuclear origin; 
- The volume reduction allowed for in anticipation of the gradual 
introduction of new treatment and conditioning techniques and of the 
optimisation of waste management at the sources of production; 
- The timing of spent fuel reprocessing and of the treatment and 
conditioning of the resulting waste; 
- The improvement of reactor operating modes, the fuel loading/unloading 
patterns and the burn up rates being regularly adjusted with a view to 
more effective economic optimisation, and inter alia, to a reduction of the 
waste arising; 
- And last but not least the shut down of several power plants and the 
dismantling of obsolete nuclear facilities; 
As the medium or long term future of nuclear power plants in operation 
today is not known in several countries; it has been arbitrarily supposed that 
they will be operated till the end of their technological life, taken as of 30 
years (see table IV). 
From the data shown in the various tables, it appears that, all in all, the 
conclusions of the 1987 report are still valid for the next years. More 
precisely, the 1987 forecasts for low and medium level waste have been 
revised slightly downwards for the period 1996-2000, while the 1987 forecasts 
for alpha waste arisings have been revised upwards, mainly as a consequence 
of the operation of the British and French reprocessing plants. The total 
production rate of conditioned low level medium level and alpha waste is 
estimated at present to about 80.000 mVyear for the Community as a whole 
and should remain approximately the same till the end of the century. The 
alpha waste accounts for 8% of that total, the medium level and low level 
waste for nearly all the remainder, or 92%. Under the assumptions made 
above concerning the future of the nuclear power programmes, the annual 
waste production will slowly decrease after 2000. 
However, the low level/medium level waste arisings may increase sharply after 
1995/2000 from the decommissioning of obsolete nuclear plants. Numerical 
figures are given in tables V and VI; they are based on strategies currently 
under study in various Member States. Several national authorities consider 
it difficult to make meaningful forecasts about the time schedule as well as 
about the amounts of decommissioning waste, for the following reasons : 
- a power plant's life may be stretched for an additional decade, according 
to on-going studies ; 
- national decommissioning policies are not decided yet; many electronuclear 
power plants may be shut down for long periods of time at the end of their 
life without being dismantled partially or totally. 
- how much radioactive waste will come out of the 12,000 to 15,000 tons of 
15 
materials (concrete, metals) resulting from the dismantling of the nuclear 
island of a 1,000 MWe power plant is not well known. On the one hand 
technological progress, notably on decontamination processes, will reduce 
the amount of waste to be disposed of; on the other hand, the rules for 
exempting some slightly contaminated dismantling materials from regulatory 
control are only under development at national and Community levels. 
As far as the spent fuel discharged from the power stations is concerned, 
almost all of the radioactivity generated by the use of nuclear energy is 
concentrated in it; the production rate amounts to about 3,400 MTHM 17) 
per year at present and will decrease to about 3,000 MTHM per year by 
2000 in the Community as a whole (table IX). These figures are a direct 
consequence of the slowing down or stopping of nuclear power programmes 
notably in the United Kingdom and Italy, and of the limitation of the present 
evaluation to nuclear plants shut down, in operation or committed, planned 
facilities being excluded. 
A major part of this spent fuel will be reprocessed during the present decade; 
as a result several hundred m3^ear of vitrified high level waste will be 
produced for the Community as a whole. 
The spent fuel of research reactors amounts to a very limited quantity of 
highly enriched material and is mostly under interim storage; this and the 
variety of fuel elements to be dealt with; make their reprocessing difficult in 
large industrial facilities. 
17.) MTHM = Metric Ton of Heavy Metal. 
16 
CHAPTERm 
PRESENT SITUATION AND PROSPECTS OF 
THE RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES 
AND POLICIES IN THE COMMUNITY 
Radioactive waste management consists of implementing a set of co-ordinated 
actions (waste sorting, treatment, conditioning, packaging, transport, storage) 
from the wastes production at the source up to their final disposal. A typical 
radioactive waste management scheme is reported in Fig. 1. 
HL1 ORGANISATION AND STRUCTURE OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE 
MANAGEMENT IN THE EC COUNTRIES 
The four main parties involved in waste management at national level may be 
identified as follows : 
- the radioactive waste producers; 
- the executive bodies responsible for all or part of waste management in each 
country; 
- the regulatory authorities; 
- the government. 
Radioactive waste producers are registered by the regulatory authorities in 
each country. The producers are generally responsible for the waste 
conditioning and packaging up to the package delivery to the disposal site. 
From this point, the responsibility of the packages is taken over by the 
disposal operator. However : 
- in The Netherlands the waste producer is only responsible for certifying that 
the waste's nature, properties, radioactivity content, etc., are in agreement 
with the acceptance criteria and specifications for central treatment and 
interim storage; 
- the general rule for responsibility mentioned above may also not apply to 
the producers of small waste quantities, the so-called "small producers". In 
this case, waste conditioning is taken in charge by a competent body at 
national level or at the "land level" in a Federal State like Germany 
(collecting stations in the "Lander"). 
Within the national regulatory framework, the disposal of wastes, and to a 
variable extent, their management is entrusted to executive bodies or national 
agencies for waste management; they have been in existence for a number of 
17 
Waste arising at the source 
Sorting by categories 
Treatment 
(volume reduction and/or deœntamination) 
Conditioning 
immobilisation into a matrix 
if needed by disposal criteria 
Interim storage 
pending disposal 
< f 
Transport 
< ' 
Disposal in near surface facilities 
or in deep geological formations 
Pip. 1. TYPICAL RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT SCHEME 
3 0V* 
years in all Member States having nuclear power programmes. 
Their various tasks and competences have been described in some details in 
the previous report of 1987. Table X summarises the present situation, 
updated as of 1991. The executive bodies accept the waste packages delivered 
to them by the waste producers for interim storage and disposal if these 
packages meet acceptance criteria. These criteria are consistent with the 
general radiological protection and nuclear safety objectives. Quality 
assurance and control procedures ensure compliance with the acceptance 
criteria. 
Since the publication of the last report, one should note : 
- the independence given to the French national agency ANDRA, which 
before depended on the French "Commissariat à l'Energie Atomique 
(CEA)"; 
- the broadening of the competence of the Belgian national agency 
ONDRAF/NIRAS to encompass decommissioning activities; 
- the transfer of the relevant department of the "Physikalisch Technische 
Bundesanstalt (PTB)" to the "Bundesamt fur Strahlenschutz (BfS)" in the 
Federal Republic of Germany; 
- the transfer of responsibility for regulating waste disposal in the United 
Kingdom to Her Majesty's Inspectorates of Pollution (HMIP and HMIPI). 
These governmental decisions reflect national consensus to optimise the 
already existing organisational and operational structures devoted to 
radioactive waste management. 
The regulatory authorities are responsible for the development of the 
regulatory framework, the control of its implementation and for the licensing 
of nuclear facilities, including radioactive waste management and disposal 
facilities. 
Finally, the governments are responsible for the national radioactive waste 
management policies and are ultimately responsible for the long term safety 
of disposal. The three other parties act in this context. 
ffl.2. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMMES. 
III.2.1 Programmes and budgets 
Important research and development programmes on radioactive waste 
management and disposal have been carried out at national and Community 
levels for many years. The amount of knowledge accumulated is 
18 
considerable1^ and gives no ground for doubting that waste could be 
managed and disposed of safely on an industrial scale. Programmes are 
therefore more and more of a research development and demonstration 
character and oriented toward the optimisation of the waste management and 
the validation of the deep underground disposal concept already under 
development (see chapter III.6.3) 
A special emphasis is being given to the following topics : 
- minimization of the waste volumes to be disposed of, especially those 
containing long-lived radionuclides (alpha waste); 
- reduction of releases of radioactivity into the environment well below 
existing discharge limits; 
- Development of deep underground repositories; safety of disposal. 
Table XI gives an overview of the budgets allocated by Member States and by 
the Commission of the European Communities for research and development 
in the field of radioactive waste management One should observe that the 
general trend during the last three years has been to maintain the level of the 
research financial effort or even to increase it 
It must be underlined that international cooperation is exceptionally strong in 
this particular area. Regarding this, the Commission of the European 
Communities has been and is still very active to promote and coordinate such 
a cooperation among the Member States notably by means of its R&D 
programme and the EC Plan of Action in the field of radioactive waste190 
HI.2.2. Advanced Research/Transmutation 
Some research programmes have been recently started to look into the 
technical feasibility and various implications of developing an advanced 
management strategy for radioactive waste - i.e. the possibility of 
transmuting long lived radionuclides into short lived ones. Such a strategy 
supposes, among others, the use of special reprocessing facilities for the 
partitioning of the relevant radionuclides and special "burners" for 
transmuting them (e.g. fast breeders reactors, accelerators, etc.). The 
strategy might increase the safety of geological disposal. Social considerations 
and political requests are therefore also prompting an effort in this area. 
This is reflected at national level in the recent French law on radioactive 
waste management research200 and at Community level in the contents of 
the present CEC R&D programme on radioactive waste management. 
18.) See, as an example, the proceedings of the 3rd European Community Conference on Radioaaive Waste 
Management and Disposal, Luxembourg, 17-21 September 1990, report EUR 13389 EN (1991). 
19.) Council resolution of 18/02/1980 - OJ. C51/1 and Commission's communication to Council COM(92)22 
of 31/01/92 on the renewal of the Plan. 
20.) Law N° 91-1381 of December 30,1991 
19 
The transmutation research effort is currently very limited in terms of 
budget; EC countries involvement mainly concerns France (a 30 man/year 
effort) and to a lesser extent The Netherlands, the Federal Republic of 
Germany and possibly Italy. Outside the Community only Japan (OMEGA 
project) and the former USSR have significant programmes. 
IIL3 SYSTEM APPROACH AND PRINCIPLES 
The management of radioactive waste comprises the collection, sorting, 
treatment, conditioning, transport, storage and, finally, disposal operations. 
These activities are closely linked through numerous interactions between 
them. They have to be seen as a system and to be dealt with accordingly. 
A "system approach" is presently being used worldwide to identify the many 
interactions between the system's components: waste package, transportation 
means, storage facility or repository, disposal site and its environment 
Delays in the definition of one component of the system may therefore have 
consequences on the development of the other ones. As an example, if the 
disposal option is being kept open, the right waste form or package may be 
difficult to select and specific packages, only adequate for interim storage 
purposes, may have to be fabricated. 
The system approach is being taken into account in the waste management 
policies of the Member States. 
General principles, the subject of an international consensus, provide the 
framework for waste management and its safety. They apply to radiation 
protection, ethical and sociological questions, environmental and natural 
resources protection, and nuclear safeguards. They are listed hereafter. 
Community regulations provide common guidelines and requirements from 
which a large proportion of national measures are derived. National measures 
therefore share several common features, mainly in the field of radiological 
protection (see Chapter V). However, policies and strategies for carrying out 
the management of radioactive waste are matters of national competences, as 
are the ways and means of ensuring technological safety. 
As a result, some differences in waste management practices exist from one 
EC country to another one, as it will be seen from the following. 
20 
GENERAL PRINCIPLES ** 
FIELD PRINCIPLE 
a) Radiation protection 
System of dose limitation JUSTIFICATION 
OPTIMISATION OF 
PROTECTION (ALARA) 
INDIVIDUAL DOSE 
LIMITATION 
b) System of control 
Ethical and sociological 
questions -* NOTIFICATION 
-> REGISTRATION 
-» LICENSING 
-* CARE FOR OTHERS 
-> PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT 
-> POLLUTER SHOULD PAY 
-* COMPENSATION FOR 
DAMAGE (CIVIL 
LIABELITY) 
Environmental and natural 
resources protection 
Nuclear safeguards PREVENTION OF 
DAMAGE 
RECTIFICATION OF 
DAMAGE 
PROTECTION OF 
NATURAL RESOURCES 
PREVENTION OF 
NUCLEAR MATERIALS 
DIVERSION 
111.4. TREATMENT AND CONDITIONING 
After collection and proper sorting, wastes are treated and conditioned. These 
activities are industrial conversion operations intended to impart to the waste 
a form appropriate to handling, storage and disposal. 
Low and medium level waste 
Almost 92 % of the volume of radioactive waste currently produced in the 
21.) "Objectives, Standards and Criteria for radioactive waste disposal in the European Community. " Report 
EUR 12570 EN (1989). 
21 
Community are low and medium level waste (see Chapter II). 
Processes for the treatment and conditioning of such wastes are available and 
industrial installations have been operated successfully since the early 1950s. 
A general description of these processes and installations was given in the 
1983 and 1987 reports. 
The treatment prepares the waste, as produced at source, for conditioning; it 
chiefly takes the form of: 
- compaction or incineration in the case of solid waste; 
- evaporation, ion-exchange and chemical precipitation followed by filtration 
in the case of aqueous waste. 
As regards solid waste, the trends identified in the 1987 reports towards 
volume minimization by supercompaction and by incineration are confirmed. 
Supercompaction is straight forward (based on established hydraulic press 
technology), is not environmentally intrusive, and is especially attractive when 
there is a limited availability of interim storage and/or disposal sites. 
As an example, the use of supercompaction techniques at the Drigg low level 
waste disposal site (United Kingdom) will extend the life of that site until 
2050. At the French low level waste disposal facility "Centre de TAube", a 
1000 tons supercompactor will be operational in 1992. Several 
supercompactors have been sold or are planned in EC Member States 
(Belgium, Federal Republic of Germany, France, Italy, Spain, The 
Netherlands, United Kingdom). 
In several cases supercompaction is performed in campaigns, using mobile 
commercial units. However, fixed supercompaction installations are used and 
planned to complement (or to take the place of) the mobile units. This is the 
case in Belgium where a large fixed facility with the necessary supplementary 
facilities (interim storage, pretreatment, cementation, control) should be 
operational before 1995. Volume reduction factors of up to 10 could be 
achieved provided that solid wastes are previously sorted out (see table XII). 
In Italy, supercompaction of low level waste, with volume reduction factors 
ranging from 3 to 6, is currently performed in fixed and mobile units. 
Incineration can produce much higher volume reduction factors220, after 
adequate segregation of the combustible part of the waste. Despite this, large 
incinerators are developing at a lower rate than supercompactors, due to their 
high cost and their need for complex antipollution off-gas scrubbing and 
filtration when burning waste of relatively high specific activity or possibly 
contaminated with alpha emitters. In addition the adequate long term 
behaviour of matrices for embedding the incineration ashes has not been 
demonstrated yet and is subject of present research (see table XIII). 
Finally, efforts done during the last few years by electricity producers with the 
22.) 20 to 40 
22 
view to waste minimization by technological means and by a relevant training 
of the personnel, have significantly contributed to reduce the waste production 
at the source. As an example, in France the average ratio of solid waste 
production from the operation of nuclear power plants has decreased by about 
8% per year, falling from 70 m3/TWh in 1983 down to 40 m3/TWh in 1990. 
As regards liquid waste, numerous facilities designed to achieve high 
decontamination factors have recently been adopted for use in certain major 
nuclear installations; for example, the Site Ion eXchange Effluent Plant 
(SIXEP) which was brought into service in 1985 for the decontamination of 
low level liquid waste at the British reprocessing plant at Sellafield (United 
Kingdon). That very large installation makes use of an ion exchange process 
which now enables the amount of radioactivity discharged into the sea to be 
reduced to only a few per cent of that discharged in the 1970s. 
Flocculation/coprecipitation decontamination processes have been used for 
several years at the CEN/SCK Mol (Belgium). Other very effective processes 
are being developed, such as ultrafiltration (membrane separation processes) 
or processes which make use of complexing agents for the most important 
radionuclides. The introduction of these processes will make it possible to 
reduce the volume of the active sludges through improved separation and may 
also result in lower residual activity in the discharges. 
Conditioning converts the treated waste into materials having low risk of 
dispersion of the radionuclides in the waste during handling and transport 
operations or by contact with water or other external agents after disposal. 
To that end, the treated waste is most frequently incorporated in matrices 
which solidify into blocks or structures possessing, with or without external 
containers, the requisite safety features (good mechanical strength, resistance 
to fire, a low leaching rate, satisfactory long term behaviour, etc.). 
The matrices most often used in the Community are as follows: 
- cements which have been employed since the 1950s mainly for low level 
waste; 
- bitumens, which were introduced between 1960 and 1965, are used by some 
Member States (Belgium, France, Denmark J; 
- polymers which were more recently introduced. 
Considerable efforts, including EC research projects, have been made to 
improve the characteristics of cement solidified waste materials, to ascertain 
their long term behaviour under storage or disposal conditions, and to enlarge 
their range of application. Positive results and simplicity of operation make 
them the most widely used matrices today for low and medium level waste. 
The treatment methods for low and medium level waste would seem, on the 
whole, to meet satisfactorily the current requirements of the nuclear power 
industry and the safety requirements of the regulatory authorities. Although 
such operations have been carried out for several decades, they still benefit 
significantly from technological advances. 
23 
Alpha waste 
Of the radioactive waste produced in the Community, approximately 8 % 
consists of products contaminated by long-lived radionuclides mainly alpha 
emitters such as plutonium, americium and neptunium. Despite considerable 
R&D efforts carried out on the development of improved treatment and 
conditioning processes, an important part of such wastes is still kept untreated 
in store mainly because definite waste acceptance criteria for disposal of alpha 
waste (high level waste excluded) in geological formations are lacking. This 
absence of criteria (which itself derives from the unavailability of underground 
disposal facilities for the near future) led to refocusing of current research 
programmes on the development of high performance decontamination 
processes capable of decategorising alpha waste in terms of disposal route. 
In other words, attempts have been made to reduce the alpha content of a 
number of waste types to such a level that these might subsequently comply 
with acceptance criteria associated with near surface disposal. In this respect, 
a number of advanced treatment processes dealing with liquid and solid alpha 
bearing wastes are under development Some of them have reached the active 
pilot scale. 
For those alpha wastes which - a priori - could not be decategorised with 
current technologies, the research efforts are being conducted towards the 
development of volume reduction techniques. In this respect, it is worth 
mentioning the melting process investigated by the CEN/Valrhô (France) for 
spent fuel hulls (inactive industrial prototype operating) and the approaching 
start up of active operation of the EARP (Enhanced Actinide Removal Plant) 
facility for the treatment of the Sellafield low and medium level liquid wastes 
(United Kingdom). 
Finally, it must be stressed that significant improvements can be realised in the 
management of alpha wastes by implementing adapted technologies to reduce 
their arisings at the source. An illustration of this statement is given by the 
experience recently gained by Belgonucleaire (Belgium) in the operation of the 
mixed oxides fuel fabrication plant of Dessel where reduction of both 
plutonium content (by 80 %) and solid alpha bearing waste volumes (by 10-15 
%) were recorded after the introduction of a fourth confinement barrier in the 
fuel fabrication line. 
High level waste 
Produced during reprocessing operations, this waste type contains almost all 
the radioactivity generated during operation of nuclear power plants. 
Conditioning of high level waste is usually performed in large commercial 
vitrification plants located in France and in the United Kingdom (Marcoule, 
La Hague and Sellafield). All the three plants are operating the same 
vitrification process relying on the use of a rotary kiln. In addition, a 
demonstration vitrification plant involving the use of a ceramic melter has 
been erected on the Dessel site (Belgium). First operated for conditioning the 
high level Eurochemic waste, this plant is intended to be next used for 
vitrifying the WAK high level liquid waste generated in the past at Karlsruhe 
(Federal Republic of Germany). 
24 
m.5 TRANSPORT OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE 
HL5.1.Provisions governing the transport of nuclear materials in general 
The transport of radioactive material has been governed for many years by the 
provisions of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) which have 
been taken into account in their national laws by all EC Member States. 
Philosophy of the regulations and basic regulatory requirements 
The prescriptions embodied in the IAEA regulations essentially aim to ensure 
that when any radioactive material is transported the following four basic 
safety requirements are met: 
a. adequate containment of the radioactive material; 
b. adequate control of radiation emitted from the material; 
c. safe dissipation of heat generated in thé process of absorbing the 
radiation; 
d. prevention of criticality, if the material is fissile. 
The IAEA regulations provide for each of these requirements by prescribing 
radiation level and release limits for both normal and accident conditions of 
transport. Rather than seeking to do this by controls such as special vehicles 
or routes, the regulations are directed towards ensuring that protection against 
the hazards of radioactive material in transport should be mainly provided by 
the packaging in which it is carried; safeguards appropriate to the nature and 
quantity of the radioactive material are "built-in" to the design of the package 
on the premise that there could be a severe accident in transport. The 
regulations specify design performance standards which are independent of the 
means of transport by which the package may be carried. 
Where the radioactivity of the intended content exceeds specified levels, the 
standards include tests for demonstrating the ability to withstand conditions 
of transport, including accidents, and require independent assessment and 
certification of compliance by the competent authority. In addition, the 
regulations require that competent authorities should institute emergency 
response measures to be followed if an accident does occur during transport. 
The primary responsibility for safety lies with the consignor of the radioactive 
material, who must declare in the transport documents that it is packed, 
marked and labelled in accordance with the applicable regulations. This 
ensures that the onus for providing safety in the transport of individual 
consignments falls mainly to the person most likely to have the necessary 
knowledge of the special hazards presented by the radioactive material, as well 
as having the resources to deal with them. A much lesser degree of 
responsibility is assigned to the carrier, who must take appropriate precautions 
to protect workers and the public during transit; for example, by ensuring that, 
his load is correctly stowed. 
25 
B) 
The regulations also require stringent quality assurance measures to avoid 
inadvertent non-compliance with safety features, and appropriate emergency 
response arrangements to mitigate the consequences of accidents or incidents. 
The effective and comprehensive nature of the regulatory system 
recommended by the IAEA has been a significant factor in achieving its global 
implementation. 
IIL5.2.Transport of radioactive waste in practice 
Radioactive waste transport and regulatory aspects 
Most radioactive wastes are transported in solid form. However, specially 
designed and shielded containers are used in some EC countries for the 
transport of liquid waste. 
Transport is mainly done from the producer to the centralised storage or 
disposal facility. Frequency of transport depends very much on the national 
situations. As an example, in Belgium about 200 shipments of non 
conditioned waste were made in 1989 and 1990 and 115 shipments of 
conditioned waste have been made in 1990, most of them from a nuclear 
power plant to the Belgoprocess storage plant. The record of radioactive 
waste transport in the EC Member States has been excellent through the 
years, showing that the technology is well in hand. 
Like all other categories of radioactive material the transport of radioactive 
waste is governed by the provisions and regulations described above. 
As far as the EC is concerned, Article 2 of the Euratom Treaty230 includes 
transport of radioactive substances in the scope of its application. However, 
the corresponding directive on the uniform safety standards (article 30) only 
contains generic requirements applicable to any activity involving a hazard 
from ionising radiation. 
Transfrontier shipments of radioactive waste 
In January 1988 a number of allegations were made relating to the movement 
of radioactive waste, in particular between Belgium and the Federal Republic 
of Germany. The CEC noted that the physical arrangements for transporting 
low and medium level waste examined were found to be in conformity with 
the relevant IAEA requirements and provided an adequate level of safety at 
all times. However it appeared that the control of the waste movement by the 
regulatory authorities had to be improved in some cases. 
Following a European Parliament's request, the CEC presented on 1 
December 1989240 to the EC Council of ministers a directive proposal adding 
shipment of radioactive waste to the activities for which prior authorisation is 
23.) Article 2 (b) provides that the Community shall establish uniform safety standards to protect the health 
of the workers and of the general public and ensure that they arc applied. 
24.) OJ. No C5/7 of 10 January 1990. 
26 
required and lays down a common system of notification and consignment 
aimed at avoiding the risk associated with the competent national authorities 
losing control of radioactive waste. This directive has been adopted by Council 
on February 3rd 1992. 
The international movement of radioactive waste has also been dealt with at 
EC level. The fourth ACP-CEE *•> Convention, signed in Lomé on 15 
December 1989, in its Article 39 deals with the international movements of 
hazardous waste and radioactive waste. The provisions include that 'The 
Community shall prohibit all direct and indirect export of hazardous waste and 
radioactive waste to the 68 ACP States while at the same time the ACP States 
shall prohibit the direct or indirect import into their territory of such wastes 
from the Community or from any other country. These provisions do not 
prevent a Member State to which an ACP State has chosen to export waste 
for processing from returning the processed waste to the ACP State of origin." 
The same question has also been dealt at worldwide level; an IAEA code of 
practice on the international transboundary movement of radioactive waste 
has been agreed upon in 1990 by the IAEA's 112 Member States. The code, 
which is not legally binding, affirms the sovereign right of every State to 
prohibit the movement of radioactive waste into, from, or through its territory. 
It further requires that transboundary movements of radioactive waste take 
place in accordance with internationally accepted safety standards, and 
respective national laws and regulations, and with prior notification and 
consent of the sending, receiving and transit States. 
EDL6 STORAGE AND DISPOSAL OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE AND SPENT 
FUEL 
BDL6.1. Introduction 
With respect to disposal operations which constitute the key and final step of 
any management route for radioactive waste, the overall situation has not 
significantly changed since 1987. On the one hand, the moratorium on the 
sea-dumping of radioactive waste 2&) is still effective and sea-dumping is 
therefore not practised. On the other hand, only one land based disposal 
facility has been put into operation, namely the "Centre de l'Aube" (which 
should progressively be substituted for the "Centre de la Manche" nearly filled 
up) for the specific case of low and medium level wastes (France). Another 
near surface repository to be operational in early 1992 is under construction 
at "El Cabril" in Spain. A number of considerations and general principles 
governing the selection of interim storage and disposal facilities as well as 
some descriptions of operating installations were already outlined in the 
foregoing report. These will therefore not be repeated here. 
25.) African, Caraibc and Pacific countries. 
26.) This moratorium has been agreed on a voluntary basis by the parties to the Convention on the prevention 
of marine pollution by dumping of waste and other matters (the so-called London Convention) in 1983, 
and is still in force pending on the completion of various studies which are expected to be finished in 1993. 
27 
However, it must be mentioned that the public unease concerning the nuclear 
industry in general already noticeable in 1987 has continued during the last 
few years, leading to the development of strong local oppositions against the 
installation of radioactive waste disposal facilities. This resulted in the 
multiplication of actions at law and moratoria which considerably delayed the 
construction and/or operation of radioactive waste repositories or 
experimental and pilot underground installations. In certain cases (like in The 
Netherlands), public opposition even delayed the operation of a centralised 
interim storage facility. 
Even if distinct differences exist between the Member States, one of the 
consequences of this situation is increase of on-site storage of nuclear spent 
fuels or radioactive waste. This also contributed to the development of very 
effective volume reduction techniques (e.g. incineration, supercompaction) to 
save room for storage. 
Other consequences are more research for improved information to the public 
concerning the potential risks associated with disposal sites, additional efforts 
to increase the safety, as well as the quality of the documentation of safety, of 
'-* the repositories and also the study of advanced management strategies 
v enabling a reduction of the inventory of long-lived radionuclides to be 
disposed of in the far future (see section III.2.2). 
Finally, it is worth mentioning that direct disposal of spent fuels - especially 
the off-standard types - is being looked at with an increasing attention in most 
•r Member States. 
HL6.2. Interim storage 
BDL6.2.1. Low and medium level radioactive waste packages 
Basically, there are two main approaches to the storage of low and medium 
level radioactive waste packages, either on the site of production or in a 
centralised interim storage facility. Both approaches are followed within the 
European Community. As quoted in table XIV, Member States having only 
a limited installed nuclear power seem to prefer centralised interim storage. 
Spain 
The centralised storage facility of "El Cabril" is composed of modules which, 
at the end of 1990, have received some 2,900 m3 of conditioned waste, 
mainly waste packages arising from small producers and CIEMAT activities. 
Waste packages from some nuclear power plants are being stored since 1988. 
Some 12,000 m3 are still stored at the reactor sites. 
The Netherlands 
Since 1984, the option of a centralised long term (100 years) interim storage 
for all kinds of radioactive waste has been adopted by the government. To 
this purpose, a facility was erected first provisional at Petten and then near 
Borsele by COVRA However, due to the local opposition, the starting of 
storage operations at Borsele was somewhat delayed. Following a positive 
decision from the Council of States, the storage operation of radioactive 
packages started from late 1991 onwards. 
28 
Belgium 
AU waste types (nuclear power plants, mixed oxides fuel fabrication, 
medicine... wastes) are currently stored at Mol/Dessel in a centralised storage 
facility. At present time, 8,300 m3 of low level waste are in store. 
Conditioned medium level waste (2,750 m3) resulting from the reprocessing 
of spent fuel by EUROCHEMIC are stored in a building called 
"Eurostorage". The available remaining storage capacity of this building 
(more than 1,000 m3) is now used for medium level waste arising from 
reactor operation. 
An additional interim storage facihty specifically devoted to reprocessing 
wastes coming from abroad is being constructed in Dessel. This should be 
operational in 1993. 
The United Kingdom 
Except for low level solid wastes which comply with the acceptance criteria 
set-up for the BNFL owned Drigg near surface disposal site, all waste types 
are currently stored on-site. A deep geological disposal facihty is however 
being planned to take both low and intermediate level wastes. 
France 
On account of current operation of two near surface disposal sites for low 
and medium level wastes ("Centre de la Manche" and "Centre de TAube"), 
interim storage mainly concerns alpha bearing wastes and part of the low 
level waste arising from small producers where decay and sorting are needed 
before release or treatment In this latter case, two centralised interim 
storage sites are available (CEN/Saclay and Tricastin). 
Federal Republic of Germany 
Pending the availability of the Konrad mine or the re-opening of the 
Morsleben disposal site, several interim storage facilities for low and medium 
level wastes are in operation at different sites. Part of the reactor waste 
packages are stored on-site, another part is stored in the Gorleben and 
Mitterteich facilities. The existing capacities are sufficient to cover the needs 
for the next few years. 
Italy 
All radioactive waste packages generated during past operation of nuclear 
facilities are stored on-site. 
Denmark, Portugal^ Greece 
Interim storage is practised in centralised facilities (Riso, Sacavém and 
Demokritos). 
29 
m.6.2.2. Vitrified high level waste 
Since the issuing of the 1987 report, the available reprocessing capacities for 
light water reactor fuels within the European Community increased by 
approximately 1,0001 per annum (mainly thanks to the operation of the UP2 
400 at its normal capacity and the recent starting of the UP3 reprocessing 
facility in La Hague in France). Accordingly, increased amounts of vitrified 
high level waste, which contains most of the fission products and long-lived 
radionuclides, are currently produced and stored (see Table VIII). 
In order to allow much of the heat and radioactivity to decay, this waste type 
has to be stored for several decades either on-site (i.e. Sellafield in the 
United Kingdom, Dessel in Belgium, La Hague and Marcoule in France) or 
in suitable faculties located in the Member States owning the spent fuel 
reprocessed abroad (see Table XV). 
In most cases, the general concept for interim storage of vitrified high level 
waste is based on the emplacement of glass blocks in double steel tubes 
cooled by natural air circulation. 
Stores are being built on a modular design that can be easily extended to 
meet future needs. 
m.6.23. Spent fuel 
The general policies of the Member States concerning management of spent 
fuel have not significantly changed since 1987 in the sense that no further 
country joined Spain and the Federal Republic of Germany in their decision 
not to reprocess most or specific categories of spent fuels respectively. On 
the other hand, the early reprocessing of spent fuels did not gain additional 
supporters. A number of countries opted for the "wait and see" option which 
consists of storing spent fuel for at least a few decades. 
Interim storage of spent fuel is mostly performed in ponds on reactor sites 
for several months or years, in order to allow the fuel to cool down before 
it can be transferred to another storage facihty. 
However, even with appropriate control of storage conditions, i.e. pondwater 
chemistry and other physical aspects of containment, Magnox fuel (produced 
in the United Kingdom) can only be stored for about three years due to the 
particular type of fuel can and the Uranium metal itself. Further storage of 
this kind of fuel can be implemented in dry conditions. 
There is greater interest in dry storage of light water reactor spent fuels 
which is gaining interest especially when long interim storage periods 
(exceeding a few decades) are aimed at. In this respect, some applications 
are expected to be made in the United Kingdom for the interim storage of 
advanced gas-cooled reactor fuels Z1). 
Also the Federal Republic of Germany is looking at this interim storage 
option. However, due to local opposition which led to actions at law, the 
storage facilities constructed at Gorleben and Ahaus do not yet accommodate 
spent fuels. 
27.) Magnox fuels from Wylfa are already stored in a gaseous environment. 
30 
In Spain, the process of designing and Ucensing a dual purpose metal cask 
(storage/transport) has been undertaken. These casks could be used for 
interim storage of spent fuel either at or away the reactor site. 
The total storage capacities (i.e. on-site and in centralised faciUties) for spent 
fuel currently available within the Member States are reported in Table XVI. 
HL6.3. Disposal of radioactive waste 
IIL63.1. Near surface disposal sites 
France 
This disposal option was subject to important developments since 1987. 
First, due to the phasing out of the "Centre de la Manche" in which 
approximately half a million of m3 of radioactive waste products containing 
short-Uved radionucUdes wiU finally be disposed of, a new near surface 
disposal site for the accommodation of the same kind of radioactive waste 
products has been constructed. This site - named "Centre de TAube" -
should receive up to 1 million m3 of radioactive waste packages. Operation 
of the "Centre de TAube" disposal site started in early 1992. 
Spain 
A similar concept, incorporating some specific design variations, has been 
undertaken in Spain at the "El Cabril" site, where a near surface repository 
is in an advanced stage of construction. The possibiUty of retrieving the waste 
packages, in case of necessity, is one of the main specific features included 
in the design of this installation. It wiU have a capacity equivalent to some 
50,000 m3 of radioactive waste packages, and its operation is scheduled to 
start by mid 1992. 
United Kingdom 
In the United Kingdom, the Drigg disposal facility has continued to receive 
low level radioactive waste packages (since 1987). However, it is worth 
noting that new specific activity limits were set in 1988 with respect to 
individual waste consignments (4 GBq alpha/ton and 12 GBq beta-
gamma/ton) and to the total quantities of groups of radionuclides disposed 
at the site in any one year. In addition, the Drigg facility is being upgraded 
in the sense that trenches have been replaced by a system of concrete vaults 
aiming at improving the overall safety of the disposal operations. The first 
concrete trench came into use in January 1989. 
Finally, it must be pointed out that investigations on additional near surface 
disposal sites for low level radioactive waste in the UK stopped in 1987 
following a government decision considering that after the allowed quantities 
for disposal at the Drigg site are reached, arisings of low level radioactive 
waste should be disposed of in a deep repository along with medium level 
and alpha wastes. 
31 
Belgium 
Near surface disposal options for conditioned low level waste are being 
investigated. The final decision concerning the disposal system is expected to 
be taken at the earliest by the end of 1992, with the view to begin the 
operation of a repository by the turn of the century. 
Studies are being performed in Belgium in order to determine the design 
basis to which a possible site must obey including preliminary Umits for the 
waste characteristics. 
On the basis of a preliminary safety review, a first site selection could be 
done leading, after approval of the safety report of the site by the authorities, 
to the construction and the start up of a disposal facihty around end of the 
nineties. 
HL6.3.2. Deep geological repositories 
BasicaUy, one can distinguish two kinds of deep repositories; those which are 
devoted to disposal of non-heat generating wastes and those which should 
accommodate all waste categories including vitrified high level waste and 
spent fuel. Although no deep repository is currently operational within the 
European Community, there are some prospects that the disposal faciUties 
installed in disused mines (in the Federal RepubUc of Germany) for non-heat 
generating wastes can start or re-start their operation by the turn of the 
century provided that political issues do not further delay the dehvery of 
operation Ucences. However, for the deep repositories to be excavated from 
geological formations (salt dome, clay, shale, granite formations), 
investigations are progressing within the framework of the construction 
and/or operation of underground laboratories which are expected to last 
several lustra still. It is worth mentioning that under the sponsorship of the 
Commission of the European Communities a close and fruitful co-operation 
between the agencies in charge of operating the underground laboratories 
has been estabhshed and that the Commission's R&D programme supports 
financiaUy research in underground pilot instaUations. 
The situation within each individual Member State concerning construction 
of deep repositories is outlined hereafter. 
Federal Republic of Germany 
As a result of successive actions at law taken by the government of Lower 
Saxony, the progress of the administrative procedure for opening the Konrad 
mine repository has been considerably delayed. The legal procedure 
("Planfeststellungsverfahren") is now at a point where after opening of the 
planning documents to the public (between 16 May and 15 July 1991) 
comments and questions are studied. The public discussion of all arguments 
will probably take place in 1992. Therefore, operation of this deep 
repository for non-heat generating wastes is not expected to begin before the 
mid nineties. The disposal capacity of the Konrad mine amounts to 
approximately 1 million m3 of radioactive waste packages. This disused mine 
will comprise six different emplacement fields, each of them being subdivided 
in several disposal rooms with a mean cross section of 40 m2 and a length 
up to 1,000 m. 
32 
For the Gorleben site which should accommodate all kinds of waste including 
heat generating wastes, above ground investigations are nearly completed. 
The underground exploration of the Gorleben salt dome is in progress. Two 
access shafts are being sunk. The end of underground investigations is 
planned for the late nineties, together with a general assessment of the 
Gorleben salt dome performances for radioactive waste disposal. The 
operation of the facility should not start before 2008. However, it must be 
pointed out that as for the Konrad mine the progress of the investigations 
and the licensing procedure are strongly dependent on political issues which 
might give rise to further delays. 
The disused Morsleben salt mine - which was operated as a deep repository 
for low and medium level waste in the former German Democratic RepubUc 
(14,300 m3 of soUd and liquid radioactive wastes as weU as about 5,800 
radioactive sources were already disposed of in it) - was shut down further 
to a decision of the Magdeburg Court of Justice taken in February 1991. In 
addition, the competent Federal German Minister ordered to stop any 
further disposal operations until a positive recommendation of the Reactor 
Safety Commission is provided. 
FinaUy, it is worth mentioning that as a support to experimental investigations 
being performed at Gorleben, an important R&D programme is being 
carried out in the Asse salt mine. 
This concerns : 
- the development and testing of the emplacement techniques for medium 
level waste packages (containing dissolution residues as weU as huUs and 
caps) and for spent high temperature reactor fuel elements (MAW 
project); 
- disposal tests of 30 simulated high level waste glass blocks spiked with 
caesium and strontium for which considerable delays have occurred: five 
years now, due to licensing problems (HAW project); 
- a demonstration experiment for direct disposal of spent fuel elements (TSS 
test); 
- the development of a multicomponent dam for use as an engineered 
barrier in galleries. 
Belgium 
Construction and operation of an underground laboratory (67 m long test 
drift with an internal diameter of 3.5 m) in the clay layer under the Mol site 
at a depth of 225 meters is underway since 1984 (HADES project). With 
this respect, several research areas have been subject to investigations, 
namely: 
33 
- monitoring of long-term stress experienced by the lining of a disposal 
gaUery; 
- Control Experiment with Radiation for the Belgian Repository 
(CERBERUS project) which consists of monitoring the in-site response of 
the clay mass to the controlled exposure of combined heat and radiation; 
- heating tests (only with electrical heaters) in order to determine the effects 
of heat sources on the surrounding clay and in the backfill materials in a 
disposal gallery (PRACLAY and CACTUS projects). 
In 1989, the SAFIR (Safety Assessment and FeasibiUty Interim Report) 
report was issued by ONDRAF/NERAS about the characteristics of the Boom 
clay as host for disposal of high active and/or long-lived isotopes. An 
evaluation commission has approved the report and issued recommendations 
in the examined field. The research programme has been defined with as 
objective a PSAR (Preliminary Safety Analysis Report) in 1997. After a 
period for the feasibiUty demonstration, a definitive site election wiU then 
become necessary. Emplacement of the first fuUy active package is not 
expected to take place before 2030. 
France 
As a first step to select an appropriate host geological formation for the 
disposal of long-Uved radioactive wastes, preliminary field investigations in 
four sites started in 1987. 
DriUing tests for seismic caUbration and hydrologie purposes were 
accomplished in a clay formation (Aisne department). The launching of a 
new campaign of drilhng tests in a shale formation (Maine et Loire 
department) gave rise to a strong local opposition which led the Prime 
Minister to call for a moratorium on field works until a law on research on 
radioactive waste disposal is discussed and approved by the Parliament. This 
law has been approved by the ParUament in late 1991. Two of the main 
features of the law are that several underground laboratories wiU be 
constructed in France and that no definite decision concerning the location 
of the deep repository will be taken before a full assessment of the 
performances of the different laboratories is completed (at the latest in 
2007). 
Although not directly connected with field investigations, an in-situ research 
programme in a 1,885 m long tunnel at Tournemire in the south of France 
was launched in late 1990. This tunnel crosses a thick clay formation 
(overlying limestone layers are 270 m thick) for which the geotechnical and 
hydrogeological conditions appeared to be representative to those of a deep 
repository. 
The United Kingdom 
UK NIREX Ltd. is currently investigating the possibilities for the 
development of a deep underground facility for low and medium level wastes. 
To this end, geological investigations involving drilling and geophysical 
34 
surveys have been performed at SeUafield and Dounreay. At both sites 
suitable hard rock formations have been found, but SeUafield has been 
chosen for detailed underground investigations and measurements during the 
excavation phase. The repository wiU consist of a series of underground 
caverns in deep rock. Construction of the caverns wiU be phased and wiU 
continue during the operational period. The preferred location is close to the 
reprocessing site at Sellafield. 
According to the current schedule (subject to the necessary permission and 
consents to be granted), construction of a deep repository for low and 
medium level waste should commence in the late nineties, leading to a 
possible operation around the year 2005. 
As far as the disposal of high level waste is concerned, the Department of 
the Environment is maintaining a watching brief on research carried out 
abroad. Neither specific concepts nor location for the disposal of high level 
waste has yet been chosen. 
Spain 
Concerning disposal of spent Ught water reactor fuels and vitrified high level 
waste, as weU as all those waste packages which wiU not comply with the "El 
Cabril" acceptance criteria, preliminary investigations aiming at identifying 
potential deep repository sites are under way since 1986. 
In paraUel, projects dealing with the preliminary conceptual design of a deep 
repository in two geological media : salt and granite, have been undertaken 
in 1990. A shmlar project for clay is contemplated to start at a later date. 
The main purpose of these projects is to provide sufficient results as to select 
reference concepts, as weU as important data to the siting process and the 
associated R&D programme. Operation of the geological repository is not 
expected to take place before the second decade of 2000. 
The Netherlands 
Although the poUcy of The Netherlands is based on long term interim 
storage (for 100 years) of aU kinds of radioactive waste (see section III.6.2.1.), 
the OPLA research programme on final disposal options in salt is stiU going 
on. The generic nature of this research programme did not yet include the 
identification of potential sites for deep repositories. Possible preliminary 
field research near sites (comprising seismic surveys and other non­
destructive field research as weU as geohydrological drillings) are not 
expected to start before the mid nineties. 
Italy, Portugal. Greece, Ireland, Denmark 
No further developments on disposal of radioactive waste have taken place 
since 1987. 
35 
CHAPTERIV 
NTICÏJRAR SAFFTY IN RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT 
IV.l. PREDISPOSAI. ACTIVITIES 
Nuclear safety must be assured in aU sectors of human activities involving the 
movements of radioactive materials and the construction, operation and 
closure of nuclear facUities. Radioactive waste management and its different 
steps make no exception. 
FaciUties and plants for the treatment and conditioning of radioactive waste 
are operated under the same general safety requirements as other nuclear 
plants. Three types of important steps forward deserve however to be 
mentioned : 
The reduction of the environmental impact by the commissioning of new 
treatment plants has drasticaUy reduced radioactive releases to the 
environment; examples are the British achievements at SeUafield and 
the French programme underway at la Hague; 
The continuous development of technologies and processes for the 
characterisation, quaUty control, identification and tracking of the waste 
forms or packages produced by the plant This does not pertain to the 
safety of the plants of concern themselves, but is an important 
contribution to the safety of. the operations foUowing in the waste 
management sequence (i.e. transport, storage, disposal); 
The constant decreasing of the occupational exposure resulting from all 
individual operations entering radioactive waste management (waste 
sorting, treatment, conditioning, handling of waste packages...). 
The present situation concerning the transport of radioactive waste has been 
reported above (see chapter III.5). The recent developments of a regulatory 
nature, the technological achievements, notably for a spent fuel transportation 
and the large experience acquired with good records give confidence that 
safety is well in hand in this sector. 
The safety of new storage facilities like the Borsele facility (The Netherlands), 
the "El Cabril" facility (Spain), or the Dessel facility (Belgium) is assured by 
appropriate designs to further minimize the risks such as flooding, fire, etc. 
When heat generating wastes, like vitrified high level wastes are stored, 
appropriate and reliable cooling is provided minimizing the risk of mechanical 
troubles. As an example, passive systems have given the Marcoule facility a 
satisfactory experience over the last twenty years and forced convection has 
been chosen for the La Hague facility (France). 
36. 
IV.2. DISPOSAL 
rV.2.1. Near surface disposal 
For safety reasons, near surface disposal is limited to low and medium level 
wastes (as defined in section II.2). It has been practised in some countries 
from the earUest days of nuclear energy. 
At the outset, wastes were buried in shaUow trenches, with or without having 
been previously conditioned and/or packaged. This early concept is now 
generaUy considered obsolete. 
As a result of progress in technology, engineering and operating experience, 
more advanced concepts have been investigated and/or implemented. The 
concept of near surface disposal in engineered structures, first demonstrated 
in France ("Centre de la Manche") in the early seventies for low and medium 
level, short-hved, radioactive waste, is now included in the radioactive waste 
management strategies of ah countries practising or considering near surface 
disposal. 
The principle underlying the concept is to isolate the waste from the human 
environment under controUed conditions and for a period of time long 
enough to aUow the radioactivity to decay naturaUy, and to return the site to 
unrestricted access afterwards. 
In reaUty, such a principle is applicable only insofar as the length of the 
institutional control period (operating period of the facihty plus post-closure 
period) is acceptable on a human scale, i.e. a maximum of a few hundred 
years. 
The appUcation of the principle relies on the use of a system of multiple 
barriers between the radioactivity and the human environment. This syst?.;-
is generaUy divided into three main components, as foUows: 
the waste package, including the physico-chemical properties of the 
waste, the characteristics of the embedding material, if any, and the 
performance of the container; 
the repository, i.e. the structures built at the disposal facUity to protect 
the waste package: disposal cap, c~~r-ete pad, other concrete structures, 
etc.; 
the geology of the site itself. 
It is the combined efficiency of these three barriers that provides containment 
of the radioactivity in normal operating and postclosure conditions, and 
ensures that the consequences of any reasonable foreseeable incident are 
acceptably low. 
Several national safety authorities have accordingly given their approval 
during the recent years to the practice of near surface disposal of low and 
37. 
medium level wastes in engineered structures. 
Within the European Community280, this applies to : 
a. the Drigg facility in the United Kingdom, following the review of its 
authorisation in 1987 by the authorising Departments; 
b. the Dounreay facility in the United Kingdom, which has been used almost 
exclusively for low level waste arising at the Dounreay site; 
c. the existing low/medium level waste disposal centre in France "Centre de 
la Manche", following its review in 1971; 
d. the new low/medium level waste disposal centre "Centre de TAube" 
licensed for operation by the French safety authorities in December 1991; 
e. the new low/medium level waste repository of "El Cabril", licensed for 
construction by the Spanish safety authorities in beginning 1990 and 
expected to be licensed for operation in Spring 1992. 
In addition, the option is under consideration in Belgium (see section III. 
6.3.1). 
IV.2JL Deep disposal in geological formations 
In contrast to engineered barriers which are unlikely to remain unalterate for 
periods of time exceeding several centuries, some geological formations (e.g. 
clay, salt and granite) have proved to be stable for more than several millions 
of years and thereby could provide a safe long term solution for the disposal 
of radioactive waste containing long-lived radionucUdes.Therefore the deep 
disposal in geological formations is being developed world-wide for alpha and 
high level radioactive wastes. 
The safe disposal of these wastes, particularly as regards the need to protect 
humans and the environment in the far future, is a subject of broad concern 
in all countries engaged in nuclear energy production, notably in the 
European Community. It is also of concern in the other countries, making use 
of radioactive materials only for medical, industrial, or research purposes. 
The safety of a disposal system for long-lived waste needs to be analysed and 
demonstrated over time scales far beyond the normal horizon of social and 
technical planning in order to obtain construction and operation licenses for 
a radioactive waste repository. Debate arises however on the feasibility of 
such an analysis and scepticism is often encountered about the validity of 
their results. 
It is obvious that absolute proof of continuing safe behaviour is impossible for 
all technical systems. Accordingly what is expected and sought is a scientific 
and regulatory process that properly considers those factors that might 
significantly affect safety, and in that way provides the basis to decide if the 
proposed waste disposal system can be considered safe enough in the long 
term. 
28.) The projected disposal facilities in North Carolina, Illinois and Pcnsylvania in the USA are examples of 
near surface disposal in engineered structures outside the European Community. 
38. 
The foUowing summarizes the progresses made in the EC in developing 
scientific ways and means to evaluate the long term safety of disposal and 
presents the results obtained so far, as well as the view of the EC experts and 
of the international scientific community. 
The safety assessment 
Safety assessment can be defined as an analysis of the future behaviour of the 
overall waste disposal system and of its potential impacts on humans and the 
environment, followed by comparison of the results with appropriate safety 
standards. 
The range of possible futures to be considered is defined using scenarios, 
based upon human imagination and scientific judgment, coupled with existing 
knowledge of natural systems (see below natural analogues) and man-made 
barriers. 
Then, predictive models are used to evaluate and quantify the effects of the 
key processes determining the performance of radioactive waste disposal 
systems, and to assess the possible radiological consequences with time. 
Adequate datas relevant to the system under evaluation and a sound basic 
understanding of the relevant physical and chemical properties of the system's 
constituents and their evolution remain a main prerequisite for successful 
modelUng. This is one of the main objectives of the current research 
programme as indicated in section III.2.1. 
The growth of the efforts to improve safety assessment has been impressive 
over the past years. 
AU countries having a relevant nuclear power programme, developed a 
competence in safety assessment and elaborated, or are elaborating, 
appropriate methodologies. 
Within the European Community, the CEC launched in 1982 a large 
multinational project (PAGIS: Performance Assessment of Geological 
Isolation Systems), as part of its R&D programme on radioactive waste, to 
support such a development in the interested EC Member States, to 
harmonize the various methodological approaches and to aUow the 
dissemination of the results. 
All interested Member States participated or were associated to this project, 
which ended in 1989. 
A methodology was elaborated with the involvement and consensus of a large 
majority of the scientists acting in the European Community in the various 
fields of this multidisciplinary activity and was applied to the case of deep 
repositories of high level waste. 
With the assumptions made, the results reported at a CEC Conference in 
Madrid in 1989, show no radioactivity release at the surface of any of the 
sites investigated within 10 000 years at least and eventually insignificant 
releases in the very far future. 
The methodology developed during the PAGIS project can be, and is already 
in some EC Member States, the basis for the performance assessment needed 
in the future, when it can be implemented with refined models and data as 
obtained from site specific investigations. 
39. 
These achievements, together with those obtained outside of the EC led the 
international scientific community to express a coUective opinion in 1990, 
which says290 : 
"safety assessment methods are available today to evaluate adequately the 
potential long-term radiological impacts of a carefully designed radioactive waste 
disposal system on humans and the environment"; 
"and appropriate use of safety assessment methods, coupled with sufficient 
information from proposed disposal sites, can provide the technical basis to 
decide whether specific disposal systems would offer to society a satisfactory level 
of safety for both current and future generations". 
Work is continuing in this field to further develop the safety assessment 
methods and to collect and evaluate datas from proposed disposal sites. 
Natural analogues : a supporting evidence of safety 
As seen above, the central issue in assessing the long-term performance and 
safety of a radioactive waste disposal fatility is the abUity to predict 
confidently the nature and effect of processes and geological events far into 
the future. 
Extrapolating laboratory data, generally obtained over months or at most a 
few years, out to reahstic times into the future, is an obvious problem. 
The processes being studied in the laboratory consider specific aspects of the 
mobilisation of radionuclides from the waste and their subsequent transport 
in groundwaters. Fortunately almost aU of the processes of interest are also 
to be found operating in the natural environment, although different elements 
and different geochemical and hydrochemical regimes may be involved. 
There is thus an opportunity to use natural analogues to assess these 
processes over geological time scales. 
Since many years already, Member States have been investigating natural 
systems (as well as archaeological and historical analogues) in and outside 
Europe. Some of them also participated to major projects, as for instance 
those at the Alligator River, Poçps de Caldas and Cigar Lake uranium 
deposits in Australia, and Brazil and Canada respectively. 
Since 1985 the Commission has supported the study of natural analogues 
through its R&D programme on radioactive waste and by providing an 
international forum (the Natural Analogues Working Group) where the 
experience gained worldwide in the field is presented and discussed. 
Evidence of the segregation and retardation capabilities of natural systems is 
accumulating, contributing to build confidence in the deep geological disposal 
concept. 
The Commission continues this effort within the framework of the fourth 
research programme on radioactive waste management and contributes 
financially to a number of studies in this area and in particular to the analysis 
29.) A collective opinion on "Disposal of radioactive waste : can long term safety be evaluated" / 
NEA/CEC/IAEA Paris 1990. 
40. 
of the natural reactor at Oklo (Gabon) led by the French "Commissariat à 
l'Energie Atomique" to which other Countries are being associated. 
The regulatory process 
For the selection of a site and up to the final licensing of a repository, the 
detailed procedure for demonstrating the safety of the system needs normaUy 
to be defined on a case by case basis: it may therefore differ in the various 
countries. In all cases it involves the responsibiUties of various organisations 
which are outlined in section III.1. The agencies and executive bodies Usted 
in Table X are responsible for providing all the elements needed to satisfy 
the competent safety authorities so that the facihty matches a set of 
preestablished criteria. 
41. 
GHAPTERV 
ONGOING REGULATORY AND POLICY ISSUES 
V.l MATERIALS PRESENTING A VERY LOW RADIOACTIVITY 
The existing regulatory measures at international, EC and national levels 
concerning the protection of the workers and of the pubhc against the ionizing 
radiations, define very clearly the conditions under which the treatment, 
conditioning, storage, transport and disposal of radioactive materials must be 
done. The scope of these regulatory measures is defined according to the 
radioactivity of the materials under consideration. 
In most regulatory regimes a grey area exists however where low level 
radioactive wastes approach levels of activity (and radiotoxicity) which are close 
to, or the same as, those existing in many naturaUy occurring substances. This 
is due to the fact that control activities are mostly concentrated in areas of 
higher risks, with a view to optimise the protection levels. The large number 
of practices involving very small quantities of radioactive materials and the 
great variety of industries which may be concerned, also explain this 
situation3**. 
Many of these practices in medicine, research and industry have been regulated 
by the relevant national authorities; the radioactive wastes produced are 
exempted of regulatory control when they comply with the relevant exemption 
criteria. However, national regulations considerably differ from country to 
country. 
At Community level, exemption for reporting to competent national authorities 
and from prior authorisation for any practice involving radioactive substances, 
is defined in the Euratom Basic Safety Standards (Directive 80/836 as amended 
in 1984). This directive quantifies the Umits for a given consignment of 
radioactive substances, which depend on the radiotoxicity of the substances. It 
also sets a general concentration limit of 100 Bq/g, which is increased to 500 
Bq/g, for solid natural radioactive substances. Materials containing radioactive 
substances in quantities and concentrations exceeding these limits may be 
released only after having obtained the agreement of the authorities. However, 
these values should not be considered as allowable amounts for unrestricted 
disposal of waste. 
As far as the nuclear sector is concerned, dismantling of obsolete nuclear 
installations is a practice under development which will produce large quantities 
of scrap, most of it materials of very low radioactivity (see section II.3.3b). At 
EC level, recommendations on "radiological protection criteria for the recycling 
30.) Waste from medical analysis and treatment, research institute waste, discarded consumer products like 
smoke detectors and spent electronic valves, waste from luminous paint industry, etc... 
42. 
of materials from the dismantling of nuclear instaUations3L) have been 
published under the umbreUa of the EC group of experts as defined in Article 
31 of the Euratom Treaty. These recommendations are presently under revision 
and are to be extended to include other material than steel, like copper and 
aluminium; at a later stage concrete is to be added. These recommendations 
are of a scientific character only. At the level of the EC Member States, most 
decisions on exemption of low level waste within the nuclear fuel cycle are 
taken by the competent authorities on a case by case basis. 
AU in aU, the situation in respect of exemption from regulatory control of 
materials presenting a very low radioactivity is not satisfactory. For this reason, 
activities for setting up coherent and scientificaUy sound rules have been 
stepped up during the last decades; several national safety authorities and 
international organisations (IAEA, OECD/NEA, WHO)320 are studying 
criteria for the exemption - partial or total - of radiation sources and practices 
from regulatory control. In the meantime, several EC Member States have 
prepared or are preparing legal measures. It should be underlined that 
harmonisation of national measures is highly recommended with a view to 
assure an equivalent level of protection within the Community. The coming 
single internal EC Market adds to the need for such an harmonisation. 
FinaUy, one must note, as already done in Chapter II, that a number of 
industrial processes leading to a further concentration of naturaUy occurring 
isotopes (an example is the treatment of phosphate ores)330 are usuaUy 
exempted from reporting to the relevant national safety authorities, or are not 
listed as practices involving radioactive materials. There may be matter of 
concern in relation to the radiological consequences of disposal of some of 
these materials. Several countries are at different stages in developing 
inventories and management strategies for these wastes and appropriate 
measures wUl be taken, if necessary. 
V.2 RADIOACTIVE WASTE EQUIVALENCE 
A number of countries are processing or conditioning some foreign waste as a 
result of commercial arrangements or as a consequence of spent fuel 
reprocessing commitments. 
Over and above any possible national policy of the receiving country regarding 
the disposal of foreign waste, a return of the precisely identical foreign waste 
in its totality to the country of origin after adequate treatment and 
conditioning, may be, in some cases, technically impossible, or 
counterproductive from a radiological safety point of view (unnecessary 
handling of radioactive materials as an example). In such a situation, one may 
consider, or indeed one may be compelled, to return an "equivalent waste". 
31.) CEC radiological protection series, Publication N°43, December 1988 
32.) IAEA SAFETY SERIES N° 89 "Principles for the exemption of radiation sources and practices from 
regulatory contror (1988) 
33.) See. Ref. 5.) page 6 
43. 
This should be carried out within an adequate regulatory framework, to be 
agreed upon by the parties involved. 
Radioactive waste equivalence has not been addressed up to now, neither in 
international nor in national regulations. The EC Council of Ministers noted 
in 1990340 the need to set up appropriate guiding principles, as a conclusion 
to a Commission's report on the subject350 
V.3 PUBLIC INFORMATION AND INVOLVEMENT 
Great efforts have been made during the last years by the various national 
authorities and/or waste operators, and by the Commission of the European 
Communities within the limits of its competence : 
- to provide information to the public about major nuclear sites and the related 
radioactive waste discharges; 
- to involve the pubUc in the decision making process with respect to the setting 
up of new installations for radioactive waste management and disposal. 
As far as the European Community Institutions are concerned, a Directive 
asking, interalia, the Member States to take care that : 
- every licensing request for a new project and the supporting information wiU 
be made available to the public; 
- the public has the opportunity to make known its opinion before the project 
is begun, 
entered into force in July 1988. The Commission shaU send a report to the 
Council and the Parliament on the Directive's application and effectiveness in 
1993. 
In many cases the public is given access to any applications to set up such 
facilities (United Kingdom, etc) and, in the case of major projects, there is 
often a public inquiry which : 
- gives the public access to information on the project under consideration; 
- collects the comments and objections of the public for consideration by the 
competent national administration. 
34.) Conclusions of the 1464th Council meeting of December 18,19, 1990, press release 10871/90 (presse 232). 
35.) "Radioactive waste equivalence", Euradwaste scries N° 3, report EUR 12879 - Office for EC Official 
Publications, Luxembourg 1990. 
44. 
In most cases, the pubUc inquiry procedure is legaUy based; it may be 
compulsory (Federal Republic of Germany, Spain, France, The Netherlands) 
or, as in the United Kingdom, for government to consider its use on a case by 
case basis. In addition, a recent French law*0 demands that a local 
information and oversight Committee, where all interested parties will be 
represented, will be established on the site of each underground disposal 
laboratory. 
In addition to the information made avaUable to the pubUc by means of 
booklets (like the Dutch information campaign of 1987) or by giving access to 
official documents, several governments (Federal RepubUc of Germany, Spain, 
United Kingdom) report at various intervals of time, to the national 
ParUaments, about the arisings and/or about the management of radioactive 
waste in their country. These reports are publicly avaUable. According to the 
recent law referred to above, the French government shaU also submit an 
annual report to ParUament on research on high level and alpha waste 
management. 
36.) Law N° 91-1381 of December 30,1991 on radioactive waste management research. 
45. 
TABLE I 
RADIOACTIVE WASTE ARISING FROM USE OF ISOTOPES IN MEDICINE. 
INDUSTRY AND GENERAL RESEARCH (m *} 
(liquid and solid waste shipped for centralized interim storage) 
COUNTRY 1991-1995 1996-2000 2001-2010 2011-2020 
BELGIUM 
DENMARK 
GERMANY 
IRELAND 
SPAIN 
FRANCE (l> 
GREECE 
ITALY 
THE 
NETHERLANDS 
PORTUGAL 
UNITED 
KINGDOM (2> 370 
100 
5,100 
some tens' 
210 
5,000 
100 
4,500 
1,600 
20 
4,960 m 370 
100 
5,100 
some tens1 (3) 
210 
5,000 
some tens 
4,500 
1,600 
30 
3,030 740 
200 
10,200" 
420 
10,000 
some tens^ 
9,000 
3,200 
80 
5,610 740 
100 
10,200" 
420 
10,000 
some tensw 
9,000 
3,200 
100 
5,610 
1) Waste volumes before treatment and conditioning. 
2) Periods resp. 1990-1994, 1995-1999, 2000-2009, 2010-2019. 
3) Unconditioned and held at site of production. 
4) Extrapolated from figures given for period up to 2000. 
5) Per five-year period. 
1/6 
TABLE H 
WASTE IN INTERIM STORAGE WHICH WAS PRODUCED BEFORE 1991. 
TREATED AND CONDITIONED OR PRESUMED 
TO HAVE BEEN CONDITTONED *> 
COUNTRY 
Belgium 
Germany 
Spain 
France 
Italy^ 
The Netherlands 
United 
Kingdom 
Denmark 
Portugal 
Greece Quantities of waste in interim storage (m*) 
low 
level 
6,000 
43,900 
15,000 
0 
10,400 medium 
level 
-
2) 
-
0 
720 
3,100 
7,930 
7000 
50 
100 18,470 
50» 
-
50 alpha 
3,000 
2) 
-
60,400 
190 
65350 
-
-high 
level 
160 
500 
-
1,040 
15 
710 
-
-Remarks 
Data per 13.1990 
Medium-level waste 
incL in low-level waste 
Medium-level waste 
incL in low-level waste 
Medium-level waste incL in low-
level waste 
Alpha waste are those MLW 
with an alpha activity 
>10 GBq/m* when in 
conditioned waste form 
Alpha-waste incL in MLW 
1) Most of the alpha and high-activity waste (stored in liquid form) has not yet been conditioned. For uniformity of presentation, 
the volumes indicated in this table are those which could be obtained by conditioning the waste with the methods available 
at present. 
2) Partially included in low level waste (as waste "without heat generation") and in high level waste (as "heat generation waste"). 
3) The unconditioned quantities in interim storage are: 12,195 m3 LLW (11,620 m3 solid and 575 m3 liquid); 585 m3 solid 
MLW; 356 m3 alpha (346 m3 solid and 10 m 3 liquid); 120 m3 liquid HLW. 
The conditioned quantities in interim storage are: 3,610 m3 LLW and 345 m3 MLW. 
A volume reduction factor between 3 and 5 for solid waste to be compacted, and a reduction factor of 1/2 for liquid LLW 
is assumed. 
Figures do not include about 5000-7000 m3 of unconditioned waste coming from medical industrial and non-nuclear research. 
4) Only half of the volume is actual waste, the rest is a surrounding concrete layer in the waste units. 
5) Stored mostly without conditioning in stainless steel containers, drums or other types of package. 
HI 
TABLE m 
LOW AND MTrnTUM LEVEL WASTE DISPOSED OF BEFORE 1991 
WITH CONDITIONING PRODUCTS AND LOST PACKAGE INCLUDED 
COUNTRY 
Belgium 
Germany 
Spain 
France 
Italy 
The 
Netherlands 
United 
Kingdom Quantities of waste (m3) 
Low 
level Medium 
level 
15,000 
96 
42,000 260 
14,3003) 
-
9,900 
464,500 
23 
8,700 
26,000 
775,000 
14,000 Type of disposal 
Sea dumping1* 
Sea dumping1* 
Deep geological 
formation 
Deep geological 
formation 
Sea dumping4* 
Near surface disposal 
Sea dumping1* 
Sea dumping1* 
Sea dumping1* 
Shallow burial 
Shallow burial Site 
N. Atlantic 
Ocean 
N. Atlantic 
Ocean 
Asse salt mine2* 
Morsleben salt 
mine 
N. Atlantic 
Ocean 
Centre de la 
Manche 
N. Atlantic 
Ocean 
N. Atlantic 
Ocean 
N. Atlantic 
Ocean 
Drigg 
Dounreay 
Moratorium on sea dumping since 1983 
In operation between 1967 and 1978 
Figures up to 1990 
Experimental campaigns in 1967 and 1969 
VS 
TABLE IV 
NUCLEAR POWER PROGRAMMES IN THE MEMBER STATES 
OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY 
COUNTRY 
Belgium 1} 
Germany 
Spain 2* 
France ** 
Italy 3* 
The Netherlands A) 
United Kingdom ** Net power installed at the end of the year 
(GWe) 
(Only power stations in operation or committed) 
1990 
5.4 
23.6 
7.1 
62.7 
1.1 
0.5 
11.4 1995 
5.4 
23.6 
7.1 
62.2 
0.5 
10.0 2000 
5.4 
23.6 
7.1 
[63.3] 
0.5 
9.5 2010 
5.4 
25.05* 
17.5 
[63.3] 
5.4 2020 
3.6 
25.0s* 
17.5 
[63.3] 
1.2 
1) The general electricity plan applies until 2000 ; there are no estimates beyond this period. 
2) The present nuclear programme only extends up to the year 2000. No provisions beyond this date 
are available. 
3) 1.1 Gwe installed, but not in operation. 
4) The development of nuclear power programmes has to be reviewed. 
5) 1st line: power stations in operation and with substitution of old stations phased out 
2nd line: idem, without substitution 
6) Will be reviewed in 1994. 
7) Figures in brackets are given for the sake of homogeneity with similar figures in other countries. 
They do not take into account the planned power stations figuring in the French Energy Plan's 
forecast : 63.3 to 66.3 GWe in 2000y74.2 to 80.8 GWe in 2010/and 80 to 95 GWe in 2020. 
V9 
TABLE V 
PRODUCTION OF LOW LEVEL WASTE, TREATED AND CONDITIONED IN VARIOUS COMMUNITY MEMBER STATES 
(Power stations in operation or committed - assumptions in Table IV, the associated fuel cycle facilities, nuclear energy research) 
Country 
Belgium 
Germany^ 
Spain7' 
France 
Italy" 
The Netherlands 
United 
Kingdom" 
Denmark r 
Quantities of waste accumulated per indicated period (m 3 ) 
1991-1995 1996-2000 2001-2010 2011-2020 Remarfci 
3,130 
35,000-50,000 
11,000 
160,000 
3,100 
(3,100+0) 
2,400 
137,530 
(104,550+32,980) 
-4,230 
50,000-71,000 
10,000 
(8,500+1,500) 
160,000 
2,700 
(1,900+800) 
2,400 
106,230 
(65,200+41,030) 
-15,785 
97,000 
(83,000+14,000) 
17,000 
(15,700+1,300) 
300,000 
4,300 
(3,500+800) 
j) 
256,730 
(77,360+179,370) 
-15,060 
97,000 
(83,000+14,000) 
40,000 
(14,600+25,400) 
300,000 
7,000 
(500+6,500) 
j) 
143,330 
(12,830+130,500) 
1,500» include partially 
MLW and alpha 
waste 
incl MLW 
incl MLW 
periods 
90-94, 95-99, 
etc 
A breakdown between waste volume from operating plants (1st. figure) and waste volume from plant decommissioning (2nd fig.) is given in bracket. 
Upper and lower estimates. 
Possible decommissioning of DR3 research reactor. 
See footnote 4 to table IV 
O 
TABLE VI 
PRODUCTION OF MEDIUM LEVEL WASTE OF ANY ORIGIN. TREATED AND 
CONDITIONED. IN VARIOUS COMMUNITY MEMBER STATES 
(Power stations in operation or committed - assumptions in Table IV) 
Country 
Belgium* 
Germany 
Spain 
France 
Italy 
Tne 
Netherlands 
United* 
Kingdom 
Denmark Quantities of waste accumulated per indicated period (m 3 ) 
1991-1995 
2500 
(2450+50) 
-
-
-
205 
-
12240 
(7240+5000) 
100 1996-2000 
2754 
(2704+50) 
-
-
-
120 
250 
11540 
(6400+5140) 
5 2001-2010 
6724 
(6624+100) 
-
-
275 
250 
23010 
(11560+11450) 
5 2011-2020 
5730 
-
-
-
18100 
(6270+11830) 
-Remarks 
i) 
i) 
i) 
4) 
2) 
Periods: 
90-94, 95/99 
etc. 
incl. alpha 
waste 
1) In accordance with management practices applied in this country, this waste is accounted 
for in other waste categories. 
2) Waste originating from fuel reprocessed abroad from present power plants. 
3) See note 1) Table V 
4) Waste originating from fuel reprocessed abroad from shut down power plants. 
S1 
TABLE VB 
PRODUCTION OF ALPHA WASTE TREATED AND 
CONDITIONED. IN VARIOUS COMMUNITY MEMBER STATES 
(Power stations in operation or committed - assumptions in Table IV) 
Country 
Belgium 
Germany3* 
Spain 
France 
Italy 
The 
Netherlands 
United * 
Kingdom Quantities of waste accumulated per indicated period (m3 ) 
1991-1995 
190 
-
-
13640 
10 
16350 
(12000+4350) 1996-2000 
540 
-
-
14060 
60 
18620 
(14230+4390) 2001-2010 
2890 
-
-
36110 
70 
20470 
(11960+8500) 2011-2020 
2430 
40 
36110 
20 
9550 
(1080+8470) Remarks 
<) 
i) 
Periods: 
90-94,95-94 
etc. 
1) Including waste originating from fuel reprocessed abroad from present power plants. 
2) See note 1} table V 
3) In accordance with waste management practices applied in this country, this waste is 
accounted for in other waste categories. 
4) No noticeable amount is estimated to arise from nuclear energy research activity. 
ST-
TABLE Vm 
PRODUCTION OF fflGH LEVEL WASTE TREATED AND CONDITIONED 
IN VARIOUS COMMUNITY MEMBER STATES 
(Power stations in operation or committed - assumptions in Table IV) 
Country 
Belgium 
Germany 2> 
Spain 
France 
Italy ^ 
The Netherlands 
i) 
United 
Kingdom fl Quantities of waste accumulated per indicated period (m 3 ) 
1991-1995 
45 
1310-1510 
-
510 
10 
-
170 1996-2000 
54 
1310-1510 
-
540 
5 
20 
260 2001-2010 
180 
2620-3020 
(5) 
-
1980 
25 
25 
130 2011-2020 
180 
2620-3020 
36 
2190 
-
-
-Remarks 
Periods 1990-
1994,1995-1999, 
etc 
1) Waste originating from fuel reprocessed abroad from present nuclear power plants. 
2) Upper and lower estimates. This category includes partially medium level and alpha 
waste. 
3) Solely from the reprocessing of UK fuel 
4) Waste originating from fuel reprocessed abroad from shut down power plants. 
5) Extrapolated from figures given for the period up to 2000. 
S3 
TABLE DC 
SPENT FUEL DISCHARGED IN THE MEMBER STATES OF THE EUROPEAN 
COMMUNITY 
Country 
Belgium 
Germany 
Spain 
France 
Italy m 
The 
Netherlands 
United 
Kingdom 
Denmark Reactor 
type 
LWR 
LWR 
LWR 
GGR 
LWR 
GGR 
FBR 
LWR 
GGR 
LWR 
GGR 
AGR 
LWR 
FBR Quantity of fuel discharged per indicated period (MTHM)iJ 
- Power stations in operation and/or committed 
(assumptions in Table IV) 
up to 
end 1990 
850 
3865 
975 
445 
6650 
4340 
342 
1353 
75 
0.2 1991-1995 
550 
2450 
800 
447 
5120 
1850 
65 
137 
73 
75 
4000 
1100 
0 1996-2000 
550 
2215 
855 
5330 
72 
75 
4000 
1200 
150 
0 2001-2010 
1100 
45006> 
4100 
1510 
10820 
140» 
2) 
23003 
15003 
1505 
0 2011-2020 
770 
5500» 
3200 
1090 
11000 
140» 
2) 
3) 
0 
1) MTHM : Metric tons of heavy metal 
2) See footnotes 3 and 4 to Table IV 
3) Data is only available up to 2005 
4) Discharge planned to be completed in 1991 
5) These datas concern reactors in operation, and do not presume decisions on the future of FBR 
6) First line : Power stations in operation, with substitution of old stations phased out; 
Second line: idem, without substitution 
LWR: Light Water Reactor 
GGR: Gas-Graphite Reactor 
AGR: Advanced Gas-cooled Reactor 
FBR: Fast Breeder Reactor 
-ry 
TABLE X 
EXECUTIVE BODIES RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL OR PART OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT 
IN THE COMMUNITY MEMBER STATES 
(see Annex for meaning of acronyms) 
Country 
BELGIUM 
DENMARK 
FEDERAL 
REPUBLIC 
OF 
GERMANY 
FRANCE 
SPAIN 
GREECE Executive body 
ONDRAF/ 
NIRAS 
public 
set up 80-81 Waste conditioning 
In parallel with the 
industrial operators Layîng-down of 
specifications and 
quality criteria 
X Quality control 
X Site studies* design, 
constructioa and 
management disposal 
• centres 
X Studies on 
management 
strategies 
X Transport of 
waste 
X Interim storage 
away from the 
production 
installations 
X 
The RISO national laboratory, by agreement with the National Health Service, is responsible for collecting and storing radioactive waste from hospitals and industry. 
Inspectorate of 
Nuclear 
Installations 
BfS 
The "waste" 
task was 
assigned to this 
Federal body 
in 1976 
ANDRA 
public 
set up on 
07.11.79 
ENRESA* 
public set 
in 1984 (Responsibility of 
the industry) 
(Responsibility of 
the industry) 
X 
(in particular cases 
and circumstances) X 
BfS 
X 
X X 
BfS 
X 
X X 
(DBE acts on behalf 
of BfS) 
X 
X X 
X 
X Performed by 
industry after 
permit from 
BfS 
X 
(partially) 
X By industry 
and/or federal 
centres 
(Landessammelst 
ellen) 
X 
The management and storage are the task of the ministries concerned in co-operation with the Atomic Energy Commission and the Demokritos Research Center. 
* including spent fuel 
TABLE X (continued) 
EXECUTIVE BODIES RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL OR PART OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT 
IN THE COMMUNITY MEMBER STATES 
(see Annex for meaning of acronyms) 
Country 
IRELAND 
ITALY 
THE 
NETHERLANDS 
PORTUGAL 
UNITED 
KINGDOM Executive body Waste conditioning Laying-down of 
specifications 
and quality 
criteria Quality 
control Site studies, 
design, 
construction 
and 
management of 
disposal centres Studies on 
management 
strategies Transport of 
waste Interim storage 
away from the 
production 
installations 
The nuclear Energy Board is responsible for the regulation of the storage and disposal of radioactive waste arising from industry, research laboratories 
and hospitals in accordance with Statutory Instrument 166/1977 
NUCLECO* 
Semi-public 
set up in 1981 
COVRA 
private 
set up in Dec. 
1982 Waste producers 
(ENEA & ENEL) 
and 
NUCLECO 
X** ENEA-DISP 
(Directorate 
for Nuclear 
Safety and 
Radiation 
Protection 
X ENEA-
DISP 
X Site 
management ENEA Commercial 
operators 
(under 
ENEA-DISP 
control) 
X** X 
(for waste from 
medical, 
industrial and 
research 
activities) 
X»*** 
The collection, packaging and storage of radioactive waste from research laboratories, hospitals and industry are carried out by the Department of 
Radiological Protection and Safety of the Laboratory Nacional de Engenharia e Tecnologia Industrial (LNETI) in Sacavém. National competent 
Authorities are the General Directorate for Primary Health Care of the Ministry of Health (Decree-Law N° 348/89 of October 12, 1989) and the 
Nuclear Safety and Protection Office of the Ministry of Environment (Decree-Law N° 425/91 of October 30,1991). 
UK NIREX Ltd 
set up in July 1982 
and made into a 
limited company 
wholly owned by 
the Government 
in 1985 Waste producer X*** X*** X*** waste producers nuclear 
operators BNFL, AEA 
NE.SN 
T 
** 
*•» 
• •*• Solely in the case of low- and medium-level waste (waste operator for providing conditioning services). 
In the case of interim storage of low- and medium-level waste. 
Solely in the case of low- and medium-level waste and alpha waste. 
New facilities for interim storage and treatment of low- and medium-level wastes are under construction and should be completed in 1991 and 1992 respeaively. 
Role covered by the Executive Body. 
TABLE XI 
ANNUAL EXPENDITURES INVOLVED IN RADIOACTIVE WASTE R&D 
ACTIVITIES 
MECU 
19871 1990 
BELGIUM 9.5 11 
DENMARK 0.6 0.3 
FRANCE 48L) 85 
FED. REP. OF GERMANY 55 57 
GREECE 0.1 0.1 
IRELAND 0 0 
ITALY 10 5 
LUXEMBOURG 0 0 
THE NETHERLANDS 4.3 3.6 
PORTUGAL 0.1 0.1 
SPAIN 4.5 7.5 
UNITED KINGDOM 56 63 
CEC 15 20 
(i) only CEA 
1 Ref : The nuclear fuel cycle : Review on R&D policies in the Member States of 
the European Community - EUR 12380 (1987) 
Si-
TABDBXn 
SUPERCOMPACTORS IN EC MEMBER STATES* 
(în opération or committed) 
COUNTRY AND 
LOCATION 
FRANCE 
Waste repository 
Centre de l'Aube 
Reprocessing plants 
La Hague AD2 
Nuclear Power Plant 
Bugey 
GERMANY 
Power Plant 
Brunsbuttel 
Research Centres 
Karlstein and Karlsruhe 
Gesellschaft fur 
Nukleare Service, 
Essen, various 
ITALY 
Research Centre/ 
Waste Processor 
Casaccia 
Nucleco, various 
THE NETHERLANDS 
Research Centre/ 
Waste Processor 
Petten 
SPAIN 
Various 
UNITED KINGDOM 
Drigg 
Dounreay 
BELGIUM TYPE 
Fixed 
Fixed 
Fixed 
Mobile 
Fixed 
Mobile 
Fixed 
Mobile 
Fixed 
Mobile 
Fixed 
Mobile 
Mobile 
Fixed MAXIMUM 
FORCE 
1000T 
1500T 
2000T 
2000T 
1500T 
1500T 
1500T 
2000T 
1500T 
1200T 
2000T 
Operational 
in 1995 WASTE 
STREAM 
Mise LLW 
Mise LLW 
Mise LLW 
(180 litre drums) 
Mise LLW 
(180 litre drums) 
Mise LLW 
(220 litre drums) 
Mise LLW 
Mise LLW 
(220 litre drums) 
Mise LLW 
(100 litre drums) 
Mise LLW 
Mise LLW 
Mise LLW 
Mise LLW TYPICAL 
VOLUME 
REDUCTION 
2-5 
2-16 
3-4 
3-10 
3-10 
3-6 
3-6 
5-10 
3-6 
5-10 
-
u Dependent on waste feed physical form. Lower range values refer to pre-compacted material 
S% 
TABLE Xm 
LARGE SCALE INCINERATORS IN THE EC MEMBER STATES* 
(in operation or committed) 
COUNTRY AND 
LOCATION 
BELGIUM 
Mol 
id 
FRANCE 
Marcoule 
Fontenay-aux-
Roses 
Pierrelatte 
Cadarache 
n 
Grenoble 
FEDERAL REPUBLIC 
OF GERMANY 
Karlsruhe 
Jiilich 
n 
SPAIN 
EI Cabril 
UNITED KINGDOM 
Hinkley Point 
and Weylfa 
Harwell 
Dounreay STATUS 
In operation 
will substitute the 
previous one 
Committed 
In operation 
n 
n 
it 
n 
In operation 
n 
Committed 
In operation WASTE STREAM 
Low level beta gamma 
solid waste + minor 
quantities of liquids 
Idem + limited 
quantities of very low 
level alpha waste 
Mise solids 
Animal carcasses 
Oil and solvents 
Spent solvents 
Pu contaminated solids 
Organic products 
alpha-solids 
Mise solids 
(beta/gamma) 
liquids 
Low level liquid wastes 
Low level solid wastes 
Low level waste, mainly 
organic and biological 
wastes 
Mise solids 
Contaminated oil 
Solid low level 
waste 
Mainly solid DESIGN 
CAPACITY 
80kg/h 
80kg/h 
80kg/h 
50kg/h 
70kg/h 
30kg/h 
30kg/h 
15kg/h 
50-60 kg/h 
50kg/h 
50 kg/h 
20 kg/h 
50 kg/h 
50 kg/h 
75 kg/h 
20/30 l/h 
136 kg/h 
3000 m3/y 
se> 
TABLE XIV 
Interim storage of low and medium level 
radioactive waste packages within the European Community 
COUNTRY 
Spain 
The Netherlands 
Belgium 
UK 
France 
Federal Republic of 
Germany 
Italy 
Portugal 
Greece 
Denmark ON-SITE 
yes 
yes 
(provisional) 
no 
yes 
yes 
yes 
yes 
no 
no 
no (^OTRAUSED SITE 
yes 
yes 
yes 
no 
yes 
(for LLW arising from small 
producers) 
yes 
(Gorleben and Mitterteich 
facilities) 
no 
yes 
yes 
yes REMARKS 
The El Cabril facility should progressively receive waste packages still 
stored on-site. 
the Borsele interim storage facility is equipped for receiving reactor and 
reprocessing wastes as well. 
All kinds of waste generated in Belgium are stored in Mol/Dessel. An 
extension of the buildings capacity for storing reprocessing wastes should 
be completed by 1993. 
Interim storage only concerns those waste types which do not comply 
with the disposal criteria for the Drigg near surface site. 
As in the UK case, interim storage only concerns those waste types 
which cannot be disposed of in a near surface site ("Centre de la 
Manche" and "Centre de l'Aube"). 
Once a disposal facility for L & MLW is available, only centralised 
interim storage sites will be operated. 
0 
TABLE XV 
Interim storage of vitrified high level waste within the European Community 
Country . 
France 
UK 
Belgium 
The Netherlands 
Federal Republic 
of Germany 
Spain 
Italy Facilities (available 
capacity in 
m3) 
Marcoule 440 
160 
La Hague 900 
720 
Sellafield 1200 
Dessel 
1) Eurochemic 250 
2) La Hague 75 
Borsele 60 
Gorleben to be defined 
i 
3 Duration of 
interim 
storage 
30 y 
30 y 
at least 50 y 
at least 30 y 
at least 50 y 
100 y 
at least 15-20 
y 
40 y 
-Date of 
operation 
1978 
1996 
June 1989 
1996 
February 1991 
1986 
1993 
2000 
still not 
defined 
2 
1994 
1 Will be defined at the turn of the century. 
2 Vitrified waste will be returned after 2010. 
3 ENEL's vitrified wastes will probably be stored at a shut down power station. 
QA 
TABLE XVI 
STORAGE CAPACITIES FOR SPENT FUEL 
(TONS OF HEAVY METALS 
Country 
Belgium 
Federal Republic 
of Germany 
Spain"* 
France 
Italy 
The Netherlands 
United Kingdom Year 
1990 
1350 
3000 
1950 
13000 
590 
0 
8,300 1995 
1350 
3000 
4030 
20400 
590 
0 
8,300'* 2000 
1350* 
3000 
4170 
21000 
580 
0 
8,300" 
* 
***** Extension of capacity is under study. 
Beyond this date, additional capacity will be provided as required. 
Additional full core discharge capacity is available. 
Away from reactor 
Including reprocessing plants and power plants 
Gl 



ISSN 0254-1475 
COM(93) 88 final 
DOCUMENTS 
EN 15 
Catalogue number : CB-CO-93-109-EN-C 
ISBN 92-77-53530-X 
Office for Official Publications of the European Communities 
LX2985 Luxembourg