CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM FOR RADIOACTIVE
WASTE
(20532)
11156/99
SEC(99) 1302
|
Commission Recommendation on a classification system for solid radioactive waste.
|
| Legal base:
| — |
| |
| Document originated:
| 15 September 1999 |
| Forwarded to the Council:
| 16 September 1999 |
| Deposited in Parliament:
| 21 October 1999 |
| Department:
| Environment, Transport and the Regions
|
| Basis of consideration:
| EM of 4 November 1999 |
| Previous Committee Report:
| None |
| Discussed in Council:
| Already adopted |
| Committee's assessment:
| Politically important |
| Committee's decision:
| Cleared; but further information requested
|
Background
11.1 There are many sources of radioactive
wastes, ranging from items such as protective clothing used in
laboratories to material arising from reprocessing nuclear fuel
or decommissioning nuclear reactors. Such wastes also have a number
of different characteristics, of which the most obvious is, of
course, the level of radioactivity (measured by alpha, beta and
gamma activity[45]).
However, other considerations — such as the potential damage
to human tissue or the environment, the rate at which the radioactive
isotopes (radionuclides) decay, and the extent to which emissions
can be reduced by appropriate shielding — are also important
so far as waste handling and disposal are concerned.
11.2 Within the UK, waste is classified
into the following four bands, according to its level of radioactivity:
- very low level waste:
this can essentially be treated as normal non- radioactive waste,
and sent to conventional landfill sites without special treatment;
- low level waste: this
requires no shielding, and is currently compacted in drums and
buried in a shallow engineered site;
- intermediate level waste:
this generally requires shielding and special handling; and
- high level waste:
this is so highly radioactive that the decay processes generate
significant excess heat; it therefore has to be vitrified from
a liquid form and stored (currently at Sellafield), pending a
decision on the final disposal option.
Of the three categories listed above and requiring
some kind of treatment, about two-thirds is low level waste. Less
than 0.5% is classed as high level waste.
11.3 However, the method of classification
varies as between different countries, including those within
the Community, often depending on whether or not a country relies
on nuclear power generation. As a result, the Community Action
Plan in the Field of Radioactive Waste[46]
called for "concerted action on the safe management of radioactive
waste", so as to make it possible to "approximate national
practices and regulations in the field of safety disposal, with
particular reference to waste categories".
The current document
11.4 The Commission is now seeking to address
this perceived need by recommending the adoption by Member States
of a common classification, based on the International Atomic
Energy Agency's system, but with some changes "to take into
account the views and practical experience of European national
experts". Under this proposal, waste would be categorised
as follows:
- transition radioactive:
which would be waste (mainly of medical origin) which will decay
within the period of temporary storage, and may then be suitable
for management outside the regulatory control system;
- low and intermediate level:
for waste in this category, the concentration of radionuclides
would be such that generation of thermal power during its disposal
is sufficiently low, and it would be divided into two further
sub-categories:
— short lived: waste with a half-life
of no more than around 30 years, with a restricted alpha long
lived radionuclide concentration;
— long lived: waste with long lived
radionuclides and alpha emitters whose concentration exceeds the
limits for short lived waste; and
— high level: waste with such a
concentration of radionuclides that generation of thermal powers
"shall be considered" during its disposal and storage.
11.5 In putting forward this proposal, the
Commission makes it clear that the classification would apply
only for national and international communication purposes, and
to facilitate information management in this field. In particular,
it stresses that the intention is not to replace the technical
criteria already used by Member State regulatory authorities for
the management of radioactive waste disposal (which are said to
require more detailed information than a Community-wide classification
system can provide). The Commission also suggests that the classification
proposed for international communication could be used initially
in parallel with national systems until 1 January 2002.
The Government's view
11.6 In his Explanatory Memorandum of 4
November 1999, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State at the
Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (Mr Mullin)
says that, since no changes to Member States' existing systems
for regulatory purposes are proposed, the Recommendation —
which he stresses is not legally binding — is likely to
have "marginal" implications for UK waste management
policy. He adds that there will, however, be a small cost incurred
by Government, the regulators and the nuclear industry in examining
its impact on the 1000 or so different waste streams whose classification
would need to be established.
Conclusion
11.7 Since this document is a non-binding
Recommendation which has already been adopted by the Commission,
and which we understand is not be discussed by the Council, we
see no reason to withhold clearance. It does, however, give rise
to three questions on which we would welcome the Government's
comments.
11.8 First, the underlying aim is apparently
to achieve a common classification between different Member States
in order to enable meaningful international comparisons to be
drawn. It therefore seems curious that the Commission should have
chosen a Recommendation, since, if Member States chose not to
observe its terms, that objective would clearly be thwarted.
In view of this, would not an alternative approach involving a
Regulation have been more appropriate in this case?
11.9 Secondly, we note the Minister's
comment that the proposal would have only marginal implications
for UK waste management policy. On the other hand, it seems to
us that to have two separate classifications systems, albeit for
different purposes, does run the risk of creating confusion in
an area where this is obviously best avoided, given the unease
which many members of the public feel about the whole subject
of radioactive waste disposal. We hope the Minister will be able
to assure us that our concerns are unfounded.
11.10 Thirdly, we would like to know
whether the proposed classification system would apply only to
material originating within the EU, or whether it will apply also
to material imported into the EU, for example, from the Central
and Eastern European countries. If the classification would apply
to waste originating from third countries, who would be responsible
for deciding the appropriate category for each batch of waste?
11.11 We would be grateful if the Minister
could respond by 10 December so that we could consider this again
before Christmas.
45 The activity of wastes is the number of radioactive
disintegrations per second in a kilogramme of material. Alpha
decay is the emission of a helium nucleus; beta decay the emission
of an electron; and gamma decay the emission of high energy X-rays
from an atom. Back
46
OJ No. C 158/2, 25.6.92. Back
|
