Note: Due to unforeseen circumstances, the publication of this Status and Trends report was delayed for several months after the “final draft” was written. During the delay period, the document
“Developing Multinational Radioactive Waste Repositories: Infrastructural Framework and Scenarios of Cooperation”, IAEA TECDOC Series No. 1413, was published (October 2004). It can be downloaded free of charge from the IAEA via the following link:
http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publications/PDF/te_1413_web.pdf
Multinational cooperation on key aspects of the nuclear cycle is required by some Member States and it is actively promoted by the IAEA [7.1] to [7.3], [7.19]. Multinational cooperation is not limited to disposal facilities, some Member States have expressed a clear interest in regional storage initiatives by some Member States with smaller nuclear programmes [7.20]. An IAEA technical document is in preparation regarding the Regional Spent Fuel Storage Facility concept (RSFSF). Among the document’s draft conclusions, the following summarizes a potential for its implementation:
It appears from the preceding discussions that the RSFSF concept is technically feasible and potentially economically viable. The group did not identify any obvious institutional deficiencies that would prevent completion of such a project. Storing spent fuel in a few safe, reliable, secure facilities will enhance safeguards, physical protection and non-proliferation benefits. The committee also recognized that the political, social, and public acceptance issues are real and difficult to address. The added difficulty due to the regional nature of the facility could well be balanced by the benefits. However, the State considering hosting such a site and the States considering being customers for such a site will need to make their own decisions on the relative weights to place on these risks and benefits and the final decision on the establishment of a RSFSF.
In response to requests from several Member States expressing an interest in multinational disposal options, the IAEA published a technical document in 1998 outlining the important factors to be considered for realizing such options [7.21]. The IAEA reviewed this previous study, taking into account developments since its publication in 1998 as well as current activities in the field of multinational repositories. This resulted in new draft document that includes a more specific examination of possible implementation scenarios and a more detailed specification of implementation conditions [7.22], [7.23]. The three main scenarios identified in the draft document are discussed below; they are classified according to the degree of self-sufficiency and independence of the repository host country:
Type I: Add-on scenario. The host country offers to complement its national inventory of wastes for disposal by wastes imported from other countries.
This scenario is characterized by the availability of all necessary resources and capabilities in the hosting country. It requires that the hosting country have the political will, the technical and financial resources and the natural conditions (geology) to develop a repository. In practice, in this add-on scenario, the repository remains effectively a national repository, but with a part of the waste inventory coming from abroad.
Type II: Cooperation scenario, in the case where multinational cooperation is, by necessity or choice, an indispensable element of repository development and implementation.
This is characterized by the participation of (partner) countries in developing a repository programme jointly together with the potential hosting country. In this case, one or more other countries interested to dispose their waste in the potential hosting country or countries will be involved directly in repository development and implementation. There are various sub-scenarios that can be included in this category; such as:
Type II-a: Several industrialized countries with relatively small nuclear energy programmes decide to cooperate for the disposal of their radioactive waste in a host country satisfying all necessary technical requirements
Type II-b: Countries with small quantities of radioactive wastes and in varying stages of development seek assistance from each other and cooperate to ensure that one of them acquires all necessary technology and institutional structures Type II-c: Specializing of repositories for specific types of waste, possibly combined with arrangements for international exchanges.
Type III: International scenario, in which a higher level of control and supervision is implemented.
It has been suggested that global acceptance of a multinational repository might be enhanced if the operation were fully in the hands of an international body. The host country would, in this scenario, effectively cede control of the necessary siting area to the international body. This scenario seems unlikely in the foreseeable future because such transfer of sovereignty is of extreme political sensitivity.
The above-mentioned scenarios should be considered as representative only. The scenarios that will be considered more fully in the future will depend on the needs and interests of potential hosting countries and on the capabilities of partner countries to respond to their requirements for implementation. Due to the very limited experience to date, it is difficult to predict the scenarios that are the most promising.
The issues and factors that need to be considered for multinational cooperation include, but are not limited to:
• the ethics of disposal (e.g., burdens for future generations),
• non proliferation (see Subsection 7.1.1),
• safety and security,
• economics and financial arrangements,
• technical requirements,
• treaties and legal agreements,
• regulatory issues,
• socio-political issues, and
• the role of international institutions.
The contributors that worked on the various drafts of the cited draft document share the conclusions of the document published in 1998 and have come to following additional conclusions:
• Multinational repositories can enhance global safety and security by making timely disposal options available to a wider range of countries. For some Member States, multinational repositories are a necessity, if safe and secure final disposal of long lived radioactive waste is to replace indefinite storage in surface facilities.
• The global advantages of multinational repositories are clear and the benefits can be significant for all parties, if they are equitably shared. For individual countries, the balance of benefits and drawbacks resulting from participation as a host or as a partner must be weighed by the appropriate national decision making bodies.
• Implementation of multinational repositories will be a challenging task. However, there are a number of conceivable scenarios under which their development might take place.
The contributors made the following recommendations:
• The concept of multinational repositories should continue to receive support from all countries that have an interest in a shared disposal solution.
• Discussion on the advantages, drawbacks and boundary conditions for multinational concepts can be initiated by interested countries without prior definition of potential host countries.
• Proponents of national and multinational repository concepts should acknowledge that both types will be implemented and should try to ensure that activities undertaken in either case do not negatively impact the other.
An immediate practical step could be to facilitate multinational or regional disposal concepts for spent/disused sealed radioactive sources.
7.3 Topical Issue: Impact of Innovative Nuclear Technologies on Radioactive Waste