iaea international atomic energy agency roger seitz addressing future human actions for safety...
TRANSCRIPT
IAEAInternational Atomic Energy Agency
Roger Seitz
Addressing Future Human Actions for
Safety Assessment
Summary from CSM on Human Action
And Intrusion in Disposal Facilities
IAEA
Overview
• Background• General Approach• Representative Categories• Site- and Repository-Specific Factors
• Regional Practices• Timing and Countermeasures
• Decision-making
2
IAEA
Position paper – Summary
Summary of the Position Paper
• General recommendations based on international publications and experiences in MSs
• Considerations and initial suggestions on the development of stylised representations of future human action
• Suggestions for a methodology to develop stylised inadvertent human intrusion scenarios and implementation for specific disposal site
• Identification of topics for a future working group
3
IAEA
Background - Perspective
Radioactive waste management is conducted in a manner that considers factors not addressed in other industries in respect of potential impacts on future generations
Consideration of future human actions after loss of institutional controls (not considered for hazardous waste)
Consideration of very long time frames
“Concentrate and Contain” philosophy Need to maintain perspective regarding the overall benefits of this approach relative to the potentially greater hazards that could result from intrusion
4
IAEA
Background - Expectations
IAEA, ICRP and OECD/NEA• Protect inadvertent intruder, not advertent
intruder• Limited stylized scenarios, current habits• Intrusion considered in the context of
intervention and optimization
5
IAEA
Potential Concept for Methodology
6
General identification of Human actions
Analysis of human actions considering Site conditions (Societal, hydro-Geological, climate, geography …)
Analysis of human actions considering Repository design (Including natural and engineered barriers, safety functions,
time-frames …)
Preliminary « qualitative » Screening of scenarios (Simple calculations, intermediate indicators …)
Representative human actions categories (Drillings, excavation works …)
List of « site specific inadvertent human intrusion scenarios » (Simple quantitative description, depth and diameter, location …)
Reduced list of scenarios (Recommandations for performance assessment)
(
Performance assessment process
Input from the general performance assessment
process (« Covering scenarios »,
biosphere data …)
Chapter 3
Chapter 4
Not developped in this paper
Set of possible human actions (Assumptions made regarding rationale and technical means)
New iterarion within the safety case developpment
Conclusions possibly giving steering indications on the siting, on the design and on the WACs
IAEA
Potential Concept for Methodology
7
General identification of Human actions
Analysis of human actions considering Site conditions (Societal, hydro-Geological, climate, geography …)
Analysis of human actions considering Repository design (Including natural and engineered barriers, safety functions,
time-frames …)
Preliminary « qualitative » Screening of scenarios (Simple calculations, intermediate indicators …)
Representative human actions categories (Drillings, excavation works …)
List of « site specific inadvertent human intrusion scenarios » (Simple quantitative description, depth and diameter, location …)
Reduced list of scenarios (Recommandations for performance assessment)
(
Performance assessment process
Input from the general performance assessment
process (« Covering scenarios »,
biosphere data …)
Chapter 3
Chapter 4
Not developped in this paper
Set of possible human actions (Assumptions made regarding rationale and technical means)
New iterarion within the safety case developpment
Conclusions possibly giving steering indications on the siting, on the design and on the WACs
IAEA
Representative Categories of Intrusion
8
Drilling and Excavation/Construction
Considerations for those categories
Direct exposure and/or exposure through groundwater ??
Based on current technologies and human habits
Scenarios should be
o illustrative indicators of safety
x predictions of safety based on what is expected to occur
Not intended to obtain “yes or no” conclusion, rather to bring
additional information for improvements to siting, design or WAC
IAEA
Site and Facility Considerations
9
Site Considerations
Natural resources
Groundwater quantity and composition
Soil, rock properties
Land use (role of passive controls)
Design considerations
Effectiveness of barriers (waste, container, facility, site) against
intrusion (delay or preclude)
Effect of intrusion (penetration, cuttings, water contamination, etc.)
Source term depletion
IAEA
Draft Report from WASSC Subgroup
10
Draft prepared but never published
Addressed many of the topics
discussed in March meeting
Systematic approach, Stylized
scenarios, Countermeasures
Identified issues related to intrusion
Time scales, Intrusion as a separate
event, Probabilities, Inhomogeneities,
Overcautiousness
IAEA
Decision-Making
11
Not “yes or no”, inform siting, design and WAC
(optimisation)
Caution to not create a situation where overly cautious
intrusion scenario could cast doubt on a very good
site/design
Maintain perspective relative to expectations in other
industries
IAEA
Perspective on Cautious Assumptions
12
Assume loss of control (unique to RW disposal??)
Assume intrusion will occur (unique to RW disposal??)
Assume intrusion occurs immediately following loss of active control?
Assume occurs within footprint of facility rather than outside footprint?
Assume direct contact with waste (or probability of hitting waste)?
Assume contact with higher activity waste (or average)?
Assume barrier is compromised (or assume delay before intrusion)?
Assume drill will not deflect around barrier, container or waste form?
Assume driller/construction worker will not recognize that something is wrong?
Assume resident establishes home/garden in cuttings?
Assume all cuttings are respirable?
Assume cuttings will behave like soil for uptake in plants?
Extreme exposure assumptions rather than similar to typical remediation
IAEA
Practical Considerations
13
Identify areas where consensus can be reached
Expected to be difficult to obtain consensus on details
regarding scenarios because of existing precedents
Focus on efforts that will contribute to a safety report
Capture considerations related to countries working to
implement new disposal capability
Geologic and near surface
IAEA
…Thank you for your attention
IAEA
Potential Discussion Topics
15
Geologic or Near-Surface
Effectiveness of Institutional Controls (land use)
Effectiveness of Barriers (timing)
Use of Stylized Scenarios
Probabilities of Intrusion
Inhomogeneities
Overcautiousness
Interpretation of results (“yes or no”, design support, etc.)
IAEA
Potential Working Groups from March
Topical areas for a future WG• WG1: Technical Conditions
– to address specifics on possible human actions based on site conditions (e.g. type of drilling, well diameter and depth, etc.)
• WG2: Societal Aspects – to address societal context of future human action scenarios (e.g. considerations on the level of development of a country, etc.)
• WG3: Linking Technical and Societal Conditions with Design – to consider the synthesis of site and societal considerations with the actual repository design to develop the full scenarios to be considered (e.g. considerations on timing of the intrusion activity)
• WG4: Practical application of results from analyses considering future human actions – to consider how scenarios regarding future human actions are used in the process of siting, designing and developing WAC – Regulatory and public perception considerations
16
IAEA
Additional Ideas
• Divide by geologic and near-surface disposal• Combine technical and societal aspects• Update draft IAEA document into Safety Report
• Considerations:• Limit number of groups• Focus on areas where consensus can be reached• Practical expectations, achievable goals• Want to have product(s) that will contribute to a safety report at the
end of the project
17