Competent authority approval processes

Due to the lengthy timescales often necessary to obtain competent authority (CA) approval and subsequent validation(s) of a spent fuel package design, industry operators endeavour, whenever possible, to submit their appli-cations simultaneously to more than one CA in an effort to reduce assessment time.

To ensure that more efficient use of resources is made by CAs in the approval and validation process, particularly for points of clarification of the cask safety case, there is a need to encourage closer liaison between CAs on individual submissions. This need is further emphasized by the facts that CA resources are finite and cask design safety cases are continually increasing in size and complexity.

There is a growing recognition that harmonization of the structure of cask safety cases and CA guidance material for applicants would be of benefit to the industry and would contribute to a more efficient and effective CA approval and validation process.

8. CONCLUDING REMARKS

The exemplary safety record of spent fuel transport is due to the high professionalism and technical competencies of those involved. The involvement of all stakeholders in the continued development of the IAEA’s international regulations and the international agreements in which the requirements feature is a key component in fostering the existing effective safety culture.

Developments in fuel designs to achieve higher levels of burnup and/or longer reactor cycle times, and in fuel management strategies, which result in the storage of spent fuel for decades before shipment, provide significant challenges to the development of transport safety cases.

Linkages between stakeholders need to be encouraged to facilitate the continual improvement and development of spent fuel transport casks and their safety cases to reflect the development of new fuel designs for higher burnup and longer reactor cycle times and the storage and disposal strategies of the future.

REFERENCES

[1] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Nuclear Power Reactors in the World April 2004, Reference Data Series No. 2, IAEA, Vienna (2005).

[2] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Regulations for the Safe Transport of Radioactive Material — 1996 Edition (as amended 2003), IAEA Safety Standards Series No. TS-R-1, IAEA, Vienna (2003).

[3] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Advisory Material for the IAEA Regulations for the Safe Transport of Radioactive Material, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. TS-G-1.1 (ST-2), IAEA, Vienna (2002).

[4] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Planning and Preparing for Emergency Response to Transport Accidents Involving Radioactive Material, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. TS-G-1.2 (ST-3), IAEA, Vienna (2002).

[5] FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS, INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, INTERNA-TIONAL LABOUR ORGANISATION, OECD NUCLEAR ENERGY AGENCY, PAN AMERICAN HEALTH ORGANIZATION, WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION, International Basic Safety Standards for Protec-tion against Ionizing RadiaProtec-tion and for the Safety of RadiaProtec-tion Sources, Safety Series No. 115, IAEA Vienna (1996).

[6] UNITED NATIONS, Recommendations on the Transport of Dangerous Goods, Model Regulations, Fourteenth Edition Revised, United Nations, New York (2005).

[7] ECONOMIC COMMISSION FOR EUROPE, European Agreement concerning the International Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Road (ADR), United Nations, New York (2004).

[8] INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGANISATION FOR INTERNATIONAL CARRIAGE BY RAIL, Convention concerning International Carriage by Rail (COTIF) Appendix B. Uniform Rules concerning the Contract for International Carriage of Goods by Rail (CIM) Annex 1, Regulations concerning the Interna-tional Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Rail (RID), 2005 Edition.

[9] ECONOMIC COMMISSION FOR EUROPE, European Agreement Concerning the International Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Inland Waterways (ADN), United Nations, New York (2005).

[10] INTERNATIONAL MARITIME ORGANIZATION, International Maritime Dangerous Goods (IMDG) Code, 2004 Edition, International Maritime Organi-zation, London (2004).

[11] INTERNATIONAL CIVIL AVIATION ORGANIZATION, Technical Instruc-tions for the Safe Transport of dangerous Goods by Air, International Civil Aviation Authority, 2005–2006 Edn, ICAO, Montreal (2006).

TRANSPORT ISSUES

DISCUSSION

W. BRACH (United States of America): I was pleased to see in your presentation an identification of the linkage of transport with storage of spent fuel. The issues you raised are critical both for storage and for transport — whether it be criticality, burnup credit or fuel degradation. I was pleased to see the identification of that linkage.

Also, you stressed the importance of competent authority coordination, and I would note that in the transport community the coordination among the competent authorities around the world is very successful. One of your overheads pointed to the need for better coordination among competent authorities in the review and approval of transport packages, and I would note that there are some countries that have been involved in such collaborative efforts, for example the United Kingdom and France, and Canada and the USA.

You stressed the importance of public outreach and engagement with regard to standards development. Within the IAEA some of the IAEA Safety Standards benefit from the involvement of the public of some countries in providing comments on the publications as they are being developed. Do you see this as an aspect that might be expanded in relation to other IAEA standards and guides?

S. WHITTINGHAM (United Kingdom): We in the United Kingdom are heavily engaged in public acceptance activities. You have to realize that you will never convince everyone. You also have to be aware that sometimes you must use different language. We need to understand what people’s concerns are. We have been talking here about regional stores. Clearly, from an industry point of view, if we had a store in Central Europe, one in North America, one in South America and so on, it would make industrial sense. In 50–100 years’

time that may happen, but it will not happen if we do not educate the public about what we are trying to do.

E. AMARAL (IAEA): You said at the beginning of your presentation that the Transport Regulations state what should be done, but not who should do it. Later, you said that it is important that the responsibilities of competent authorities and stakeholders be defined somewhere. As you know, the Basic Safety Standards (the BSS) are being revised, and it was agreed at the last meeting of the Commission on Safety Standards that the BSS should be maintained as a comprehensive document linking the Safety Fundamentals with the thematic requirements. Do you think that, if the responsibilities of competent authorities for storage, transport and disposal were addressed in the BSS, this would facilitate the transport issue?

S. WHITTINGHAM (United Kingdom): Certainly, any document that sets out a framework of responsibilities would be very useful.

A. GONZÁLEZ (Argentina — Chairperson): I would like to mention two things which Mr. Whittingham did not mention and which I consider important. One is the need for the international coordination of research and development for resolving particular issues. Transport is a good example of an area where there has been international coordination — in the development of transport casks, in the conduct of safety assessment, and in the investigation of the surface contamination of spent fuel containers.

The second thing I would mention is the issue of international reviews or, as they are called within the IAEA, ‘appraisals’. Appraisal is a word used by diplomats instead of the word ‘inspection‘’, which they do not like. Transport is also a good example of an area where appraisals are carried out, and this is an issue I would like to see discussed later in the conference.