Perspective of Decommissioning

Worldwide in View of Metrological Needs

Vladimir Michal

Team leader, Decommissioning and Environmental

Remediation, Waste Technology Section, NE Department

Global Status of Nuclear Facilities [Sources: IAEA PRIS; Research Reactor & NFCIS Databases]

Status Nuclear Power Reactors Research Reactors Nuclear Fuel Cycle

Facilities

Operational 444 243 329 (+ 5 in commissioning

phase)

Under Construction 65 8 25

Long-term / temporary Shutdown

2 19 28

Permanent Shutdown 140

134 96

Under Decommissioning ~50 58

Fully Decommissioned 17+ ~300 127

Small industrial facilities using radioactive material : several ‘000s

NPP decommissioning statistics

Decommissioned power reactors (17+)

USA (11 units):

Big Rock Point (BWR), Fort St. Vrain (HTGR), Haddam Neck (PWR),

Maine Yankee (PWR), Rancho Seco (PWR), Trojan (PWR), Yankee Rowe

(PWR) – 7 units decommissioned, but independent spent fuel storage

installations (ISFSI) are there as a stand-alone facility within the plant

boundary. Licenses have been reduced to include only the spent fuel

storage facilities.

Pathfinder (Superheat BWR), Saxton (PWR), Shippingport (PWR),

Shoreham (PWR) – 4 units with the license terminated.

Note: Another two prototype units, not listed in the IAEA PRIS Decommissioning

module were decommissioned – Elk River (BWR) and Carolinas-Virginia Tube

Reactor (PHWR). Some sources (e.g. OECD/NEA) consider them as the power

reactors.

Fort St. Vrain nuclear power plant was decommissioned and site reused for Fort St. Vrain Generating Station

Yankee Rowe nuclear power plant was decommissioned; ISFSI is placed on a small part of the original site

Germany (4 units)*:

Grossweltzheim (prototype superheated steam reactor), Niederaichbach

(HWGCR), Kahl (experimental BWR), Stade (PWR).

* Another two units can be considered as dismantled, but not delicensed with

potential to be reused as a part of larger nuclear sites – Unit No. 5 of Greifswald

NPP (WWER) and Gundremmingen A (BWR).

Switzerland (1 unit): Lucens (HWGCR)

Japan (1 unit): JPDR (PWR)**

** Used as a testing site of Japanese decommissioning technologies

Decommissioned power reactors (17+)

Number of power reactors with deferred dismantling (safe

enclosure) implemented as a decommissioning strategy (55):

UK – 25, USA – 13, Canada – 6, Ukraine – 3, Germany – 2,

RF – 2, Sweden – 2, Spain – 1, Netherlands – 1

Estimated number of power reactors with a kind of

combination of immediate and deferred decommissioning

strategies (in accordance with GSR Part 6): ~15

Number of power reactors under immediate dismantling: ~70

Deferred vs. immediate dismantling

Follow-up considerations

• Annual rate of power reactors shutdown for decommissioning varies from 2 to 12 with tendency to increase;

• Realistic estimation is that about 80+ power reactors may be shutdown for decommissioning worldwide in the next decade;

• Some studies indicate that this number can be doubled, presuming that no further life extensions are granted;

• Total value of the decommissioning market is high (GlobalData estimation is more than $80 billion);

• The biggest decommissioning market is European, second is Asia-Pacific, third is North America.

Decommissioning needs

• Financial needs (e.g. cost estimation for Jose Cabrera – $341 million, Loviisa – $237 million, Bohunice V1 – $753 million);

• Needs in technologies, R&D and innovations for characterization and survey, segmentation and dismantling, decontamination and remediation, monitoring and site release;

• Management of large amount of materials and waste – recycling, storage, disposal;

• Education and training – long-term strategic planning of recruitment and training needs, preservation of knowledge and knowledge transfer, collaboration between organizations.

Decommissioning metrology needs

• Physical and radiological characterization for

decommissioning purposes;

• Characterization of large amount of material

generated as results of decommissioning activities;

• Characterization of radioactive waste;

• Monitoring on-site and off-site;

• Measurement and monitoring of waste repositories.

What should be considered …

• Characterize, characterize, characterize (‘jain’);

• Characterization is not a stand-alone objective;

• Characterization has to serve to decommissioning

& waste management purposes;

• Practical vs. scientific approaches;

• Optimization in terms of procedures, techniques,

time, workforce, costs etc. …

Related IAEA activities

• International Network of Laboratories for Nuclear

Waste Characterization (LABONET)

• https://www.iaea.org/OurWork/ST/NE/NEFW/WTS-

Networks/LABONET/overview.html

• International Decommissioning Network (IDN)

• https://www.iaea.org/OurWork/ST/NE/NEFW/WTS-

Networks/IDN/overview.html

Metrology for decommissioning is not specifically covered in

the IAEA publications; radiation metrology, environmental metrology …

International Conference on Advancing the Global Implementation of Decommissioning and Environmental Remediation Programmes

– Madrid, Spain, 23-27 May 2016, about 600 participants;

– Co-sponsor EC, in co-operation with OECD/NEA and EBRD;

– Purpose: to review challenges, achievements and lessons learned related to D&ER programmes that have been implemented during the past decade;

– Key goals: (i) raising awareness of the importance of addressing the legacies from past activities, (ii) identifying current priority needs and (iii) providing recommendations on the strategies and approaches that can enable and enhance safe, secure and cost-effective implementation of national and international programmes during the next one to two decades.

http://www-pub.iaea.org/iaeameetings/50801/DER

D&ER Conference follow-ups

• Continued development and/or revision of IAEA Safety Standards relevant to D&ER;

• Support or enhance in all MS:

– application of IAEA Safety Standards,

– implementation of good practices for D&ER.

• Encourage implementation of international peer reviews in MS to provide for application of the Safety Standards and international good practices:

– the new ARTEMIS peer review service is available to support this objective.

• Capacity building: Continue and enhance activities to advance implementation of D&ER in MS through: – collaborative projects,

– communities of practice,

– dedicated training programmes.

• Technology: Support development of new technologies and knowledge sharing of best practices;

• Societal aspects: Supporting the transfer of best practice and experience in the realm of stakeholder engagement and decision making processes.

D&ER Conference follow-ups

• Further the development and implementation of

radioactive waste management solutions as they pertain

to D&ER, including the development of methodologies

and guidance;

• Promote and support the establishment of centers of

excellence for training of operators, contractors and

regulators;

• Support the sustainability of the supply chain for D&ER

projects;

• Capture and propagate the lessons learned from D&ER,

which can be used to further reduce waste, through

improvements in the future design and operation of

plants.

D&ER Conference follow-ups

Atoms for peace

and development

at your service for 60 years…

21