Stakeholders involvement related to the siting of a new LILW repository

Transcription

1 Ministry of Economy, Commerce and Business Environment Nuclear Agency & Radioactive Waste (ANDR) Stakeholders involvement related to the siting of a new LILW repository Antonius GHEORGHE-SORESCU, Stela Diaconu IAEA's Training Meeting on Building Partnership in Waste Disposal Programme 31 October 2 November 2011, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

2 Map Romanian Nuclear Facilities Baita Bihor repository Milling and mining Milling and mining Research reactor Cernavoda NPP Research Reactor 2

3 42,50% 0,02% 13,74% 17,33% 26,41% Cernavoda NPP Romania s Energy Structure 2011 Nuclear Hydro Gas&Oil Wind Coal Nuclearelectrica S.A. Units 1 & 2 Energonuclear S.A. Units 3 & 4 3

4 Institute for Nuclear Research - Pitesti TRIGA 14 MW Steady State Core Post Irradiation Examination Laboratory The Dry Storage Pits Annulus Core Pulse Reactor (ACPR) 4

5 Horia Hulubei National Institute of R&D for Physics and Nuclear Engineering 5

6 The strategy for the management of RW resulted from operation and decommissioning of NPP and research reactors, institutional activities, nuclear fuel fabrication, uranium mining and milling 6

7 The strategy for the management of spent nuclear fuel resulted from operation both of NPP and of research reactors 7

8 General information Cernavoda NPP Saligny site Toward Cernavod a site Saligny Village Waste inventory: LILW/SL with certain quantities of LL radionuclides generated by operation and decommissioning of 4 nuclear power units at Cernavoda NPP. 2 scenarios: 30 and 40 years of operation / unit. Site: Saligny site located between Cernavoda NPP and Saligny village (in the exclusion area of NPP). Land owners: Saligny Local Council and private owners (42ha disposal facility, 23ha repository) Disposal concept: Surface facility with multiple barriers 8

9 Authorization procedure of near surface disposal facilities The phases associated with the life of a repository are: Siting (SAR, description of the conceptual design, conceptual plan for closure, site selection studies, environmental agreement, management system conceptual plan, any other document request by CNCAN); Construction (revised SAR, preoperational environment monitoring program, management system conceptual plan, any other document requested by CNCAN); Operation (SAR, technical operating procedures, program of control of systems on the safety, revised conceptual plan for closure, waste acceptance criteria, limits and condition for operating, intervention plan in case of radiological events, environmental licence, any other document requested by CNCAN); Closure (SAR, environment monitoring program, detailed closure plan, limits and conditions for closure, program of control of systems and components on the safety in post closure, any other document requested by CNCAN) Active institutional control (SAR, environment monitoring program, program of control of systems and components on the safety in post closure, any other document requested by CNCAN) 9

10 Siting process in brief (1/2) 1992 The Dobrogea region was selected in a regional mapping stage; the site selection process identified 37 potentially sites; Nuclearelectrica National Company supported a R&D program for siting a new LILW repository for Cernavoda NPP sites were suitable (Saligny, Cernavoda and Mireasa); candidate sites were selected (Cernavoda and Saligny); 1997 Preference was given to Saligny site 1998 Nuclearelectrica submitted to CNCAN a site license application; CNCAN requested for the environmental agreement and made requirements and comments for the review of the safety assessment; The site selection process slowed down after 1998, due to mostly nontechnical reasons ANDRAD started to coordinate the siting process by collecting technical and safety documentation in order to continue the siting process; 10

11 Siting process in brief (2/2) 2006 ANDRAD requested the assistance of the IAEA through WATRP to assess the development ofthe repository; Technical documentation improved 2008 CNCAN granted the partial siting license for a new LILW repository to be sited at Saligny; Technical documentation reviewed (Phare projects) 2009 A WATRP peer review of ANDRAD s documentation and technical programme for the development of a near-surface repository for lowand intermediate-level radioactive waste at Saligny, Romania 2010 CNCAN prolonged the partial siting license 2011 Certificate of urbanism issued by the Saligny town hall for preparing the Urban Area Plan 11

12 Partial siting license to continue the completion of site characterization, to apply for the environmental agreement, to prepare the urban development documentation, and to buy the land. 12

13 Definition of a stakeholder Any institution, group or individual with an interest in or a role to play in a societal decision making process* The reality is YOU don t get to decide who the stakeholders are, stakeholders select themselves *source: OECD/NEA (Fuller definition available in IAEA GS-R-3 Safety Requirements document) 13

14 Who are our stakeholders? Politicians Regulators Waste producers Media Local community NGO s Neighboring Countries International Organisations Etc., etc. 14

15 Legislative and regulatory system NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR NUCLEAR ACTIVITIES CONTROL (CNCAN) regulatory body in the nuclear field NUCLEAR AGENCY & RADIOACTIVE WASTE (ANDR) Promoter of the nuclear energy development in Romania (power and non power applications), exclusively for peaceful purposes; Responsible for disposal of radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel, and ensure at national level the coordination of the nuclear installations decommissioning processes; Waste producers responsibility From waste generation until disposal; 15

16 ANDR-local community relationship -In 2007, the Saligny Local Council and the other owners of the land offered ANDR their written consent for field investigations in order to characterize the Saligny site; -Recently, on the occasion of issuing the Urbanism Certificate, ANDR and the Local Council of Saligny agreed a local development strategy, which include: - The construction of new roads and the rehabilitation of the old ones; - Creation of 200 new jobs during the construction stage and 32 during the operation stage, -Improved medical services, including long term health monitoring - ANDR agreed with the local representatives in Saligny to create a partnership for the public involvement in the decision-making process related to the siting, construction and operation of a surface repository for the LILW generated by Cernavoda NPP. 16

17 Greenpeace vs ANDR (1/5) In 2010, Greenpeace filled an action against CNCAN and ANDR requesting: partial siting license suspension; ordering them to conduct public consultations (Article 4 and 6 of Aarhus Convention) The reasoning of the request: CNCAN and ANDR did not inform the public as required in art. 7 of Aarhus Convention, therefore breaching the provisions of the Aarhus Convention and of the European directives regarding SEA and EIA transposed in Romania, because the repository environmental impact assessment has not been performed 17

18 Greenpeace vs ANDR (2/5) Greenpeace (Aarhus Convention): the public consultations for any plan/programme should be performed before decision making, while options are still open. This means that the consultations should be made in a moment when the decision regarding the site has not been taken and money for the future facility have not yet been spent because otherwise it means that the siting decision is final and there are no opportunities for the public to participate in the decision making process; the public opinion against the project would not bring any change to the plan/programme, therefore it would not be taken into account; the public from the neighboring States should have been consulted (Espoo Convention). 18

19 Greenpeace vs ANDR (3/5) Leaflets and brochures Press-Conferences and Press-Releases Meetings with local communities representatives Seminars and Round Tables 19

20 Greenpeace vs ANDR(4/5) The Court in law dismisses the request as ill-founded (February 2011): the Court in law highlights that the requirement regarding the public participation wasn t mandatory at the moment of issuing the partial siting license, this document being only a principle act, a decision of the regulatory body, without material effects; the environmental agreement and implicitly the public participation procedure are necessary at the time of obtaining the final siting license. 20

21 Greenpeace vs ANDR (5/5) In October 2011 Greenpeace appealed, considering the decision illegal and illfounded because: The Court ignored the provisions of art 9.2 of Aarhus Convention regarding injunctive relief of the acts or procedures; The Court in law did not analyze the acts that are under elaboration by the Beneficiary following the obtaining of the partial license. In this period, all the documents regarding EIA and SEA are in progress. Therefore, at the moment when these documents are finalized, the requirement of art. 6 of Aarhus Convention could not be accomplished, because if the entire documentation, from siting to the feasibility study and technical project, is finalized, and the options are not open anymore, the public participation would be purely formal. To be continued 21

22 Any questions? Thank you for your attention! Saligny disposal system- A solution for the safety of population and the environment Conclusion Aware of the importance of the social and ethical components in the development of a new radioactive waste repository, ANDR strives for ensuring the three pillars of Aarhus Convention: access to information, public participation in the decision-making process and access to justice. 22

23 Contact AN&DR Bucureşti Str. I.D. Mendeleev, nr , sector 1 Tel.: , Fax: Mioveni Str. Câmpului, nr. 1, CP , jud. Argeş Tel.: Fax: contact@nuclearagency.ro 23