Radioactive waste disposal implications of extending Part IIA of the Environmental Protection Act to cover radioactively contaminated land.
A short study has been carried out of the potential radioactive waste disposal issues associated with the proposed extension of Part IIA of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 to include radioactively contaminated land, where there is no other suitable existing legislation. It was found that there is likely to be an availability problem with respect to disposal at landfills of the radioactive wastes arising from remediation. This is expected to be principally wastes of high volume and low activity (categorised as low level waste (LLW) and very low level waste (VLLW)). The availability problem results from a lack of applications by landfill operators for authorisation to accept LLW wastes for disposal. This is apparently due to perceived adverse publicity associated with the consultation process for authorisation coupled with uncertainty over future liabilities. Disposal of waste as VLLW is limited both by questions over volumes that may be acceptable and, more fundamentally, by the likely alpha activity of wastes (originating from radium and thorium operations). Authorised on-site disposal has had little attention in policy and guidance in recent years, but may have a part to play, especially if considered commercially attractive. Disposal at BNFL's near surface disposal facility for LLW at Drigg is limited to wastes for which there are no practical alternative disposal options (and preference has been given to operational type wastes). Therefore, wastes from the radioactively contaminated land (RCL) regime are not obviously attractive for disposal to Drigg. Illustrative calculations have been performed based on possible volumes and activities of RCL arisings (and assuming Drigg's future volumetric disposal capacity is 950,000 m3). These suggest that wastes arising from implementing the RCL regime, if all disposed to Drigg, would not represent a significant fraction of the volumetric capacity of Drigg, but could have a significant impact on the radiological capacity with respect to 226Ra plus 232Th. The government's decision-making programme for managing solid radioactive wastes in the UK may possibly achieve a general consensus that the use of landfill for LLW from the RCL regime has a fundamental role to play. However, this is unlikely to change the situation within the next few years. No new national facility arising from this programme is likely to be available during the first decade of the operation of a new RCL regime. Hence it appears that Drigg will need to play an important role for some years to come.
Nancarrow
D J
DJ
Atkins Environment, Woodcote Grove, Ashley Road, Epsom KT18 5BW, UK. david.nancarrow@atkinsglobal.com
White
M M
MM
D006801:Humans; D011835:Radiation Protection / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D011850:Radioactive Waste; D012990:Soil Pollutants, Radioactive / Q000032:analysis*; D006113:United Kingdom; D018505:Waste Management / Q000592:standards*
D011850:Radioactive Waste; D012990:Soil Pollutants, Radioactive