Technical Report 2/2015/ENG
REQUIREMENTS, SUITABILITY
INDICATORS AND CRITERIA FOR
THE SELECTION OF POTENTIAL
DEEP GEOLOGICAL REPOSITORY
SITES
Authors: Antonín Vokál
Ilona Pospíšková
Lukáš Vondrovic
Miloš Kováčik
Lucie Steinerová
Pavel Dusílek
František Woller
Prague, July 2015
REQUIREMENTS, SUITABILITY INDICATORS
AND CRITERIA FOR THE SELECTION OF
POTENTIAL DEEP GEOLOGICAL REPOSITORY
SITES
Authors: Antonín Vokál
Ilona Pospíšková
Lukáš Vondrovic
Miloš Kováčik
Lucie Steinerová
Pavel Dusílek
František Woller
Contents
1
Introduction .......................................................................................................11
1.1
Document purpose .................................................................................................11
1.2
Existing documents ................................................................................................11
1.3
Scope .....................................................................................................................12
2
Basic requirements ...........................................................................................13
3
Site selection suitability indicators .................................................................14
4
Site selection method .......................................................................................17
5
Design-related requirements, suitability indicators and criteria ..................19
5.1
5.1.1
Feasibility regarding the underground part .............................................................20
Size of the usable rock block ...........................................................................20
5.1.2
Rock environment properties required for the construction of the underground
part of the deep geological repository ..............................................................................20
5.2
6
Above-ground part construction feasibility ..............................................................21
5.2.1
Construction stability .......................................................................................21
5.2.2
Infrastructure availability ..................................................................................22
5.2.3
Number and complexity of conflicts of interests ...............................................22
5.3
Costs ......................................................................................................................22
5.4
Summary of the suitability indicators ......................................................................22
Safety requirements, suitability indicators and criteria .................................25
6.1
Introduction ............................................................................................................25
6.2
Long-term safety ....................................................................................................25
6.2.1
Site describability and predictability .................................................................25
6.2.2
Hydrogeological site properties .......................................................................26
6.2.3
Site stability .....................................................................................................28
6.2.4
Factors increasing the likelihood of human intrusion into the repository ..........30
6.2.5
Compatibility of the rock environment with the engineered barrier system
designed 30
6.2.6
Transport properties of the rock environment ..................................................33
6.3
Summary of suitability indicators for site assessment from the long-term safety
aspect 34
6.4
6.4.1
Operational safety ..................................................................................................37
Radiation protection ........................................................................................38
6.4.2
Ensuring general as well as specific mining safety during the repository
construction and operation phases ..................................................................................38
6.5
Summary of suitability indicators for site assessment from the DGR operational
safety aspect ....................................................................................................................40
7
Environmental requirements, suitability indicators and criteria ..................43
7.1
8
SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASPECTS ..........................................................................49
8.1
9
Summary of environmental suitability indicators .....................................................44
Role of the Working Group on Dialogue in the decision-making process ................50
Concluding provisions .....................................................................................51
10 References.........................................................................................................52
List of tables
Table 1: Summary of suitability indicators for the deep geological repository site selection
process ................................................................................................................................14
Table 2: Design requirements and suitability indicators ........................................................23
Table 3: Summary of suitability indicators for site assessment from the DGR long-term safety
aspect ..................................................................................................................................34
Table 4: Summary of the requirements and suitability indicators for site assessment with
respect to nuclear safety, radiation protection and mine safety.............................................40
Table 5: Summary of the environmental criteria ...................................................................44
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
List of abbreviations
DSS
Decision Support System
EDU
Dukovany Nuclear Power Plant
EDZ
Excavation Damaged Zone
EIA
Environmental Impact Assessment
ETE
Temelín Nuclear Power Plant
EVL
Site of European importance
GAP
Gap Analyses
DGR
Deep Geological Repository
CHKO
Protected Landscape Area
CHLÚ
Protected Deposit Area
IAEA
International Atomic Energy Agency
ICRP
International Commission on Radiological Protection
JE
Nuclear Power Plant
MAAE
International Atomic Energy Agency (Czech abbreviation)
MZV
Czech Ministry of Foreign Affairs
NEA-OECD
OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development)
Nuclear Energy Agency
NJZ
New nuclear sources
NP
National Park
NPP
Nuclear Power Plant
NPR
National Natural Reserve
OS
Storage and Transport Cask (also “Packaging”)
PP
Natural Park
PR
Natural Reserve
PS
Working Group
RAW
Radioactive Waste
RVESS
Government Council for Energy and Raw Material Strategy
SSG
IAEA methodological guideline for implementation of specific safety
requirements
SSR
IAEA specific safety requirements
UNESCO
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
UOS
Disposal Canister
VAO
High-level Radioactive Waste
VJP
Spent Nuclear Fuel (SNF)
ZCHÚ
Highly protected area
ZUPA
Interest area at the site of a deep geological repository
6
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
ŽP
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
The environment
Glossary of terms
Requirement
Condition that is dictated by legislation and must be met at any stage
of the repository development (e.g.: the repository must be safe in the
long term and the effective dose must not exceed the optimisation
limit of 0.25 mSv during one calendar year for an individual from the
critical population group).
Function
Purpose that the repository or a part of it serves (for instance: the
main function of a DGR is to safely store all radioactive wastes that
cannot be accepted by near-surface repositories; the main safety
function of a disposal canister is to confine the radionuclides within
the repository).
Denudation
Set of processes that cause wearing away (levelling) of the Earth's
surface leading to altitude decrease and diminishing ground surface
height differences.
Suitability indicator
A property of a site that can be used during some stage of the site
selection process to assess how that site meets the safety, feasibility
and/or environmental protection requirements.
In-situ experiments
Experiment performed on-site, e.g. in underground laboratories.
Isolation section of a repository
That part of the underground repository in which
radioactive wastes are stored.
Exclusion criterion
A property (suitability indicator) of a site ruling out its use for hosting a
repository.
Conditional criterion
A property (suitability indicator) of a site such that a certain technical
provision must be implemented for the site to be usable for hosting a
repository.
Preference
A property (suitability indicator) of a site that is favourable for the
deep geological repository there.
Conservative approach
An approach that is based on the assumption that, for safety
reasons, the input data for calculations and estimations should
describe the most unfavourable case. The actual risk of an
activity/system should not be higher than the conservative estimate.
Describability
Property of a site making it possible, by using appropriate site
examination methods, to gain information required for describing the
site and making a decision as to its suitability for siting a DGR there.
Predictability
Property of a site that, based on information gained by the site
description procedure, warrants the assumption that the long-term
DGR safety will be ensured during the entire period during which the
wastes stored in the DGR must be isolated from the environment.
7
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
Decision-making process The procedures and plans for the decision-making process can
be designed so that they are both clear and traceable, e.g. from the
points of view of the process concept, its phases and practical
implementation.
Transparency
Procedure/approach that is adequately clear, apparent and verifiable.
8
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
Abstract
One of the Radioactive Waste Repository Authority’s highest priorities is to select a suitable
site for underground disposal of spent nuclear fuel and radioactive waste that does not meet
the requirements for disposal in near-surface repositories. This document summarizes
the various requirements, suitability indicators and criteria involved in the deep geological
repository site selection process that will be used during the first stage of the process of site
selection from candidate sites identified before based on general criteria for the siting of a
nuclear facility. It is based on a detailed analysis of the recommendations of the International
Atomic Energy Agency and similar documents compiled in other countries which are in the
process of developing a deep geological repository. The document describes the
requirements, suitability indicators and criteria relating to the feasibility of repository
construction, long-term and operational safety, environmental impacts and, importantly,
acceptability of the selected site by the population living in the town and villages near the
site. Prior to a detailed geological description of the potentially selected sites, i.e. at the
stage when all the requisite information, data and arguments to demonstrate long-term safety
are not yet available, the selection must be made based on characteristics (suitability
indicators) demonstrating that the sites selected are safer than other sites, that the rock
environment is suitable for this purpose and/or the construction of the repository will be
technically less intricate and/or less costly. The requirements for a site intended to
accommodate a deep geological repository will be refined as new information is gained. The
requirements for the site will be collected, registered and included in revisions of this
document.
Keywords
Deep geological repository, site selection, requirements, suitability indicators, criteria
9
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
Abstract in Czech
Jedním z prioritních úkolů Správy úložišť je vybrat vhodnou lokalitu pro hlubinné úložiště
vyhořelého jaderného paliva a radioaktivních odpadů, které nemohou být přijaty
do provozovaných přípovrchových úložišť (vyhořelého jaderného paliva a dalších
radioaktivních odpadů). Tento dokument shrnuje požadavky, indikátory vhodnosti a kritéria
výběru lokalit pro umístění hlubinného úložiště, podle kterých budou v první fázi výběru
lokalit hodnocení potenciální lokality, které byly vybrány již dříve na základě obecných
kritéria na umístění jaderného zařízení. Vychází z podrobné analýzy doporučení Mezinárodní
agentury pro jadernou energii a obdobných dokumentů ze zemí, které hlubinné úložiště také
připravují. Zahrnuje požadavky a kritéria týkající se proveditelnosti úložiště, dlouhodobé
a provozní bezpečnosti, dopadů na životní prostředí a v neposlední řadě také přijatelnosti
umístění úložiště v lokalitách pro obyvatele dotčených obcí. Před podrobnou geologickou
charakterizací potenciálních lokalit, kdy nemohou být k dispozici všechny potřebné
informace, data a argumenty pro prokázání dlouhodobé bezpečnosti, je třeba výběr lokalit
provádět na základě charakteristik (indikátorů vhodnosti), které indikují, že vybrané lokality
pro umístění hlubinného úložiště jsou bezpečnější než jiné lokality, umístění úložiště méně
ovlivní životní prostředí či umístění úložiště bude méně náročné na technické provedení
či náklady. V průběhu získávání nových poznatků při přípravě úložiště se budou upřesňovat
požadavky na lokalitu pro hlubinné úložiště. Tyto požadavky budou shromažďovány,
evidovány a zahrnuty do revizí tohoto dokumentu.
Keywords in Czech
Hlubinné úložiště, výběr lokality, požadavky, indikátory vhodnosti, kritéria
10
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
1 Introduction
1.1 Document purpose
All radioactive waste / spent nuclear fuel disposal-related activities in the Czech Republic fall
within the competence of the Radioactive Waste Repository Authority, established in 1997
based on Czech Act No. 18/1997 [1]on peaceful uses of nuclear energy and ionising
radiation (Atomic Act) and on the amendment of some acts.
One of the Radioactive Waste Repository Authority’s highest priorities is to select a suitable
site for underground disposal of spent nuclear fuel and radioactive waste that does not meet
the requirements for disposal in near-surface repositories. Czech Government Resolution
No. 995 of 20 December 2012 required the Minister of Industry and Trade, by 31 December
2018, to select (through SÚRAO) two candidate sites for the siting of a DGR and to submit
the proposal, accompanied by the opinions of the directly affected municipalities, to the
Czech Government for approval. However, since the procedure handling the request for
identification of the survey areas at the potential sites has already been taking over one year,
the two candidate sites are expected to be selected no earlier than 2020. This
postponement, though, should not have an immediate impact on the subsequent time
milestones for the DGR siting, design, construction and commissioning, i.e. the final site
should be selected, the opinions of the affected municipalities obtained, and the application
for territorial protection of the selected site submitted in 2025, as supposed in the Updated
RAW and SNF Management Concept, discussed and acknowledged by the Czech
Government in December 2014.
The present document summarises the requirements for the site characteristics and
properties that will be applied as the criteria for the selection of sites suitable for the siting of
a deep geological repository with respect to feasibility, safety and environmental impacts on
the towns and villages nearby.
1.2 Existing documents
The requirements and criteria for the selection of a site for the construction of the deep
geological repository have been described and analysed by a number of previous SÚRAO
documents – [3] to [8], [18].
The site selection criteria were primarily based on the following geological requirements [7]:





Tectonic stability
Rock massif describability
Warranted assumption that the rock massif will remain stable in the long run
Simple hydrogeological situation and low rock environment permeability
Favourable geomorphological situation at the site with respect to the technical
feasibility of geological survey and DGR siting
Other important aspects to be taken into account when selecting the potential sites included
potential conflicts with Act No. 114/1992 on nature and landscape protection [9] and with
other applicable legislation ([10] to [22]). Such criteria were applied to the selection and
assessment of the sites within the Geobarrier project [6].
11
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
The present document updates and completes the requirements and criteria for siting the
deep geological repository taking into account a number of new recommendations issued by
the IAEA [2], [25], [26], [40], [59] to [61], NEA-OECD [29], and WENRA (Western European
Nuclear Regulators Association) [27], [28]. For the site selection process, stress is laid on
DGR safety, feasibility and minimum environmental impacts and impacts on the living
conditions of the population in the area affected. Analogous documents developed by other
countries preparing a DGR ([31-7]) are also very important sources of information and
reasoning.
1.3 Scope
The text of this document is equivalent to that of Methodological Guideline MP.22 as a
binding SÚRAO guideline. A number of comments on this document can be expected during
the project implementation process. All comments will be collected and registered on an
ongoing basis. Relevant comments will be included in the revisions hereof.
12
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
2 Basic requirements
The following basic requirements regarding the selection of potential sites for the
construction of the DGR are based on the requirements set out in Act No. 18/1997 [1] and its
implementing regulations [19] to [22], in other Czech acts and regulations [9], [10], Council
Directive 2011/70/EURATOM establishing a community framework for the responsible and
safe management of spent fuel and radioactive wastes [23], a number of IAEA
recommendations [2], [17], [25], [26] and ICRP recommendations [52], and the Joint
Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive
Waste Management [43]:
1) The repository must have the capacity to accept all radioactive waste emerging within
the Czech Republic from the operation and decommissioning of existing and/or
planned nuclear power plants and from the use of ionising radiation in the industry,
research or the medicine sector, that does not meet the requirements for disposal in
near-surface repositories. The DGR must be feasible in terms of construction using
verified technologies that are available now, while radiation protection must be
optimised so as to ensure the highest possible level of safety. The costs of the DGR
construction and operation must be in line with the radiation protection optimisation
principle, i.e. taking into account the economic and social factors [20].
2) The site must ensure repository safety, which must be demonstrated based on
existing knowledge of the site taking into account all potential risks existing during the
repository operation and post-closure stages. The optimisation limit for safe RAW
disposal is an effective dose of 0.25 mSv per calendar year for an individual in the
critical population group [20] for the normal repository development scenario and
1 mSv/year for the scenario involving human intrusion to the wastes.
3) The repository siting must not be in obvious conflict with, or pose a significant threat
of excessive damage to, highly sensitive ecosystems, and it must not bring about
deterioration of the status of any component of the environment or of the living
conditions for the population within the area [9], [10].
4) The decision on DGR siting must be prepared in such a way that the public
(stakeholders) has adequate opportunity to actively participate in the site selection
decision-making process [23]. The draft decision on the two selected candidate sites
and ultimately on the final site to be submitted to the Czech Government must be
accompanied by the standpoints of the affected municipalities on this issue.
In fact, all the information, data and arguments required, in particular, to demonstrate longterm safety and to make a detailed environmental impact assessment will not be available at
the time of reduction of the number of potential sites preceding the detailed characterisation
of the candidate sites. Hence, the short list of sites meeting the general requirements must
be prepared and the candidate sites selected from that short list based on site characteristics
and properties indicating that it may be feasible in the future to clearly demonstrate
operational and long-term safety of the DGR and its acceptable impacts on the environment
and on the living conditions of the population within the area (= suitability indicators).
In line with those basic requirements, the derived requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria were classed in 3 categories:
1) Design requirements, suitability indicators and criteria
2) Safety requirements, suitability indicators and criteria.
13
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
3) Environmental requirements, suitability indicators and criteria.
The requirements for a transparent site selection process involving participation of the
affected public and local governments are specified in Section 8.
3 Site selection suitability indicators
The deep geological repository site selection suitability indicators derived from the above
basic requirements for the feasibility, safety and living condition are summarised in Table 1
below.
A description of the derived suitability indicators and their rationale are given in the text. The
suitability indicators relating to the DGR feasibility are described in Section 5; the suitability
indicators relating to the DGR safety are described in Section 6; and the suitability indicators
relating to the impacts on the environment and on the living conditions are described in
Section 7. The text also informs about suitability indicator values excluding the siting in the
given area.
Table 1: Summary of suitability indicators for the deep geological repository site selection process
Requirement
Repository
construction
feasibility
Requirement
specification
Size of the usable rock block in the specific area at the
Feasibility regarding
specific depth
the underground
Rock environment properties with respect to the
part
construction of the underground part
Stability of the building structures
Feasibility regarding Technical infrastructure availability
the above-ground
Number and complexity of conflicts of interests
part
Investment costs
Costs
Long-term
(post-closure)
safety
Site suitability indicators
Site describability
and predictability
Running costs
Extent of uncertainty in the description of the geologic
structure and tectonic situation at the site
Extent of uncertainty in the description and
predictability of the hydrogeological situation at the site
Variability of the rock properties
Applicability of standard geological survey methods
Distance between the waste disposal areas and any
water-bearing fault zones
Occurrence of open and brittle structures in the
Hydrogeological
isolating part of the rock environment (rock massif
properties of the site segment identified for the construction of the
underground part)
Water flow rate in the isolating part of the rock.
14
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
Earthquake intensity and presence/distance of any
potentially active faults (seismic stability)
Site stability
Extent of area surface depression/elevation (vertical
movements of the Earth's crust)
Presence of post-volcanic phenomena
Tendency to climate changes
Probability of
inadvertent human
intrusion into the
repository
Presence of mineral resources
Presence of major groundwater or geothermal energy
sources
Indicators of past human intrusion into the rock (deep
geological boreholes, abandoned mines)
Thermal properties
Compatibility of the Hydraulic properties
Mechanical properties
rock massif
properties and the
Geochemical properties
engineered barriers
Microbiological properties
Gas permeability
Radionuclide transport and retardation times
Transport properties Radionuclide solubility in groundwater
of the site
Radionuclide concentration decrease due to mixing
with uncontaminated waters and dispersion
Implementability of provisions to ensure radiation
Radiation protection
protection of the public
of the public and of
Implementability of provisions to ensure radiation
the employees
protection of the employees
Ensuring normal
safety and mining
safety
Operational
(pre-closure)
safety
Factors limiting the
implementability of
the emergency plan
and/or of action in
the event of
emergency
External risks
Implementability of provisions to ensure normal safety
Implementability of provisions to ensure mining safety
Close vicinity of the national border with impacts on the
implementability of the emergency plan
Occurrence
of
cultural
objects
limiting
the
implementability of emergency action
Swiftness of arrival of the fire brigade, mining rescue
service, medical rescue team
Provisions to ensure early information of the population
and evacuation of the employees
Implementability of provisions to prevent sabotage
Natural external risks (earthquake intensity, occurrence
of zones of movement-active and seismically active
faults, volcanic phenomena, floods and flood waves)
External human-induced risks (fire, explosions, aircraft
accidents)
15
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
Environmental deterioration due the DGR construction,
mining activities and operation of other DGR industrial
facilities
Environmental
impacts
Environmental
impacts,
impacts on the
living
conditions
Impacts on important public values, particularly on
areas under legislative protection (national parks,
reserves, areas of specific scientific and/or cultural
interest, historical areas)
Impaired water supply and extent of risks to existing
surface water/groundwater sources
Impacts on the landscape
Impacts on the life of plants and animals (endangered
species in particular)
Impacts on the economy of the region and
municipalities (e.g. on the number of new
jobs/enterprises)
Impacts on the infrastructure development of the region
Impacts on the living and municipalities
conditions
Impacts on the prices of real estate (including land) in
the region, towns and villages
Impacts on the area’s recreational potential
16
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
4 Site selection method
The site for the deep geological repository will be selected, in line with the IAEA
recommendations [2] and with Council Directive (EU) for the management of spent fuel and
radioactive waste [23], by a procedure consisting of consecutive steps where the list of
potential sites will be shortened as our knowledge of the sites broadens and deepens. The
sites selected within the first stage should possess properties suggesting that all the
requirements for the DGR may be met and this may be credibly demonstrated. The site data
and information will be refined and deepened within each consecutive stage by using a more
detailed geological survey and more analyses. The true proof of construction feasibility and
repository safety at the candidate sites from the short list will only be obtained following
detailed description of the rock environment.
The following will be performed for the selection of the two candidate sites:
1) Geological survey and research at the potential sites with a view to obtaining data
required to assess the suitability indicators listed in Table 3. Since some data cannot
be obtained from surface geological survey or from a survey with a limited number of
deep boreholes, such data will have to be replaced, during the first stage, with data
and reasoning from similar sites, laboratory experiments and in-situ experiments at
underground facilities or via expert estimates. Detailed information regarding the
method to collect such data is presented in the SÚRAO document “Medium term plan
for the research and development of activities needed for DGR siting” [62].
2) A specific plan will be developed for each site at a conceptual level and a feasibility
study will be prepared to assess whether the construction of the repository at the site
is feasible.
3) A safety assessment report at a conceptual level will be developed for each site and
for the specific design selected for that site, with a view to demonstrating, with an
uncertainty appropriate to the particular stage of the project, that the DGR will be
safe.
4) An environmental impact assessment study will be developed for each site, targeting
the impacts on the environment and on the living conditions within the area.
The requirements for repository capacity and DGR safety have an optimisation limit
determined by the amount of wastes to be stored and by legislative requirements for
demonstrating the safety [1]. All sites that meet the feasibility and safety requirements are
appropriate (from the point of view of those two requirements) for the ensuing geological
survey phase. Among important criteria with respect to both the feasibility and safety are the
uncertainties of the analyses. The uncertainties must be acceptable for the particular stage of
the DGR site selection process. This acceptability will be assessed by independent experts.
If the independent experts consider the uncertainty unacceptable for the particular site
selection stage, then either additional data must be collected (if available) or the site must be
abandoned (if the data are unavailable).
An essential criterion to be applied to the short list of sites meeting the feasibility and safety
criteria with acceptable uncertainties is the impact of the DGR on the environment and on the
living conditions in the towns and villages and in the region during the preparatory,
construction, operation and post-closure stages.
17
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
The requirements, suitability indicators and criteria associated with the socio-economic
conditions of repository acceptability by the inhabitants of the affected towns and villages will
be discussed by the Working Group on Dialogue [72]. The requirements, suitability indicators
and criteria that emerge from the discussion and are not covered by the EIA process will be
included in the revisions of this methodological guideline and taken into account during the
multicriterial analysis of the selection of the candidate sites and the final site (for more detail
see Section 8).
The impacts of the DGR siting on the environment and on the living conditions in the region
and in the towns and villages will be analysed by using multicriterial assessment methods
that are routinely applied to environmental impact assessments. The specific approach to the
assessment and the method of determination of the weight of each indicator will be
discussed with experts as well as with the affected public prior to the multicriterial analysis
proper.
18
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
5 Design-related requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria
A deep geological repository is a specific type of nuclear facility consisting of two operational
parts, each with its specific activities and radioactive substance handling practices and
specific requirements for the construction and equipment lifetimes.
The one operational part encompasses constructions, equipment and technologies required
for the operation of the repository, i.e. for the waste and SNF acceptance, SNF reloading
from the storage casks to the disposal canisters and putting the SNF and RAW into the
disposal area. Such constructions may be built either on the ground or underground. The
equipment must satisfy, as appropriate, criteria and selection procedures stipulated by Czech
legislation covering nuclear and environmental issues and ground and underground civil
engineering practices [1], [9] to [16], [19] to [22].
The other operational part of the DGR encompasses the waste disposal vaults and tunnels
and is located underground. The requirements covering this part are formulated at the
general level only in the Atomic Act and in the related SÚJB regulations ([1], [19] to [22]) as
well as in IAEA recommendations ([2], [17]). One of the reasons for this general nature of the
requirements is the fact that the requirements for a deep geological repository are tightly
linked to the specific site and include a number of presumptions specific for the geological
environment available in the country of origin of the wastes.
The specific technical solution of the DGR will be affected appreciably by a number of initial
and boundary conditions, which can be categorised basically into the following groups:
1) The first group includes conditions of strategic nature, in particular, specification of
the amounts and properties of the wastes and the state in which the wastes are
submitted for disposal. Among such condition are the decisions as to whether the
wastes will be non-processed fuel or reprocessing waste; whether the hot chamber
serving to reload the fuel into the disposal canisters will be part of the DGR area or
such activities will be performed elsewhere (within the NPP area for instance) and the
repository will receive the waste in the final disposal canisters.
2) The second group includes requirements and limitations arising from the site
properties. With respect to the underground area, this primarily encompasses
requirements regarding the feasibility of constructing the DGR without affecting the
site properties important for ensuring long-term and operational safety. First of all,
however, the rock block must be large enough to be able to accommodate all the
current and expected future radioactive wastes produced within the Czech Republic.
With respect to the above-ground facilities, the important factors include ground
morphology at the construction site; ground soil parameters; presence/absence of
geodynamic processes and phenomena (e.g. slope deformations, gully erosion, ...)
that might affect the size and configuration of the ground area and siting of some
important and auxiliary technologies; possibility of connection to local infrastructure;
price; etc.
3) Legislative requirements constitute another important group. A deep geological
repository is a nuclear facility with an underground area and an above-ground area.
19
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
So it is subject to and must meet all the relevant requirements of legislation covering
nuclear power, mining, civil engineering and environmental protection issues.
4) The last group comprises socio-economic conditions of acceptability of the proposed
solution to the public affected. This concerns, in particular, public requirements for the
siting of the above-ground facilities and the associated technical infrastructure in the
landscape and minimisation of adverse impacts of the facility construction and
operation on the environment and living conditions.
5.1 Feasibility regarding the underground part
5.1.1 Size of the usable rock block
The approach to the technical solution of the deep geological repository must respect the
geological and tectonic situation of the rock massif so that the long-term safety requirements
should be satisfied. The fact that the geological situation will hardly allow the entire repository
volume to be used for disposal canisters storage must be taken into account. The storage
area may be intersected by a number of brittle structures (fractures and fissures), fault zones
and lithological and other structural inhomogeneities. Major inhomogeneities are
impermissible in the waste disposal area.
In the Czech reference DGR concept, the engineered barriers for spent fuel disposal are
formed by the disposal canister-bentonite system. One of the most severely limiting
conditions of the entire system is the requirements that temperature must not exceed 100 °C:
this is a temperature at which some engineered barriers may be degraded faster, and, in
particular, ensuring long-term repository safety may be problematic at temperatures in
excess of 100 °C. In this context, the residual heat produced by spent nuclear fuel and the
thermal properties of the engineered barriers and of the rock environment are among the
basic design parameters to be considered when assessing the suitability of a rock massif for
the construction of a DGR.
The disposal canister storage method is another important design parameter. The repository
may encompass either one or two disposal horizons. Furthermore, the canisters may be
stored vertically in boreholes in storage corridors or horizontally or subhorizontally in long
storage boreholes. While vertical storage will enable us to respond flexibly to the existing
geological situation, storage of the same amount of waste may require considerably more
space than as encountered in the horizontal or subhorizontal arrangement.
This indicator has values ruling out construction of the repository at the site. A usable rock
block must enable, with an adequate margin, all the relevant radioactive waste volumes to be
stored in the DGR.
5.1.2 Rock environment properties required for the construction of the
underground part of the deep geological repository
The properties of the rock itself and the behaviour of the rock massif, groundwater and the
strain status of the rock environment play an important role in the construction of the
underground area and affect the driving technology and its economics.
An important adverse role is played by brittle structures (fissures and faults) that may result
in overbreaks, wall distortion or reactivation of displacements along discontinuities. The rock
20
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
block should exhibit the least possible tectonic effects manifesting in brittle rock
deformations. The excavation disturbed/damaged zone (EDZ/EdZ) should be as small as
possible. The size of the excavation disturbed zone will be affected by factors including
drifting work technology.
The ease or difficulty of the drifting work will be affected by how easily the rock can be drilled
and mined, which are factors that are primarily determined by the lithological properties of
the rock environment (mineralogical rock composition, grain size, grain direction – foliation),
by the properties of the discontinuities and by the rock's strength parameters.
The siting of the DGR in the area may be ruled out if proven mining technologies cannot be
used there.
The hydraulic properties of the rock environment also constitute an important factor for the
underground area building stage. Too large mine water inflow will have an adverse impact on
the pace and technical complexity of the drifting and securing work as well as the
subsequent economy of the repository operation. Too high a hydrostatic pressure may impair
the stope stability and, in turn, adversely affect the working conditions and occupational
safety. Those risks may be partly eliminated through technological measures, such as the
use of supports or grouting. The materials used for such corrective measures, however,
should not adversely affect the performance of the engineered barriers or the properties of
the rock environment from the long-term safety aspect.
5.2 Above-ground part construction feasibility
Current conceptual approach to a deep geological repository assumes that activities that are
subject to the provisions of the Atomic Act and its implementing regulations will be performed
above the ground or in the near-surface layers. This concerns, in particular, SNF reloading to
the disposal canisters, their handling, home-produced RAW disposal, etc. So, the area for
siting the above-ground part of the DGR must respect the requirements of SÚJB Regulation
No. 215/1997 regarding criteria for the siting of nuclear facilities and very significant ionising
radiation sources
5.2.1 Construction stability
Criteria laid down in Regulation No. 215/1997 must be applied when selecting the site for the
DGR. The various sites can be compared by using the conditional criteria specified in
Article 5 of the Regulation.
Factors that are important from the construction stability aspect include, in particular,
geotechnological properties of the ground soil (load-bearing capacity and compressibility in
particular), any presence of slope deformations (especially deep-founded faults) and gully
erosion, and groundwater regime and circulation, level height and its fluctuations and
chemical composition.
Actual data from the various potential sites can be used to compare and assess them from
the feasibility point of view.
Repository siting may be ruled out if unsuitable values of the construction stability
parameters are identified. Some of the conditional criteria listed in Regulation No. 215/1997
may also be applied as suitability indicators for a comparison of the potential sites.
21
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
5.2.2 Infrastructure availability
Among the requirements put on the site for the DGR is availability of local infrastructure – not
only transport infrastructure but also technological infrastructure (railway network, road
network, power grid, dumping ground for the overburden and mined rock, cell phone
coverage, reasonably short distance from the medical emergency service, fire brigade, mine
emergency service, RAW generators).
Hence, the potential sites will be compared also from this point of view, in other words, the
availability and comprehensiveness of the existing infrastructure will be mapped and the
demands for and costs of building new infrastructure (where it is lacking) or modifying
existing infrastructure will be assessed for each site.
Information on the availability of the required infrastructure will be verified.
5.2.3 Number and complexity of conflicts of interests
Each potential site will be analysed with respect to the number and complexity of conflicts of
interests with legal protection of property, phenomena, natural objects and buildings and
structures present in the area (power lines, gas lines, product lines, communications, surface
water and groundwater protection, transport, nature and landscape protection, mineral raw
materials and the rock environment, archaeology, forest protection). The issue of conflicts of
interests with environmental protection is described in more detail in Section 7.
5.3 Costs
First of all, it must be demonstrated that the technical solution considered is adequately
robust from the safety aspect. However, the financial aspect should also be taken into
account, in other words, the solution selected should be adequately safe and economically
feasible.
The costs of the DGR construction are divided in the capital costs of the repository
construction (covering both the above-ground and underground parts) and the running costs
including manufacturing costs of the engineered barrier and human resource cost for the
repository operation period.
Since the conditions for the technical solution of the construction may be different at the
different sites, the costs of the proposed solutions (which must be satisfactory from the
technical and safety aspects) will be compared (for example, more costly disposal canisters
must be used at a site with a less favourable rock environment to ensure the same level of
safety).
The costs of constructing the repository are not an issue of first priority but they are important
when comparing site suitability where more than one site meets the safety requirements and
the impact on the environment and on the living conditions is comparable.
5.4 Summary of the suitability indicators
The design requirements a criteria for the selection of a site for the construction of the deep
geological repository are summarised in Table 2 below.
22
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
Table 2: Design requirements and suitability indicators
Indicator
Feasibility
regarding the
underground
part
Size of the
usable rock
massif
Indicator type1
Description
Comparison to
exclusion
The usable massif must enable all the
RAW intended to be disposed of by
storage in the DGR to be accepted by the
repository (with a margin) and must
enable the underground repository to be
built by means of current technologies.
Comparison to exclusion
The usable massif must be adequately large
in size to be able to accommodate all the
expected waste received while meeting all
the applicable technological and safety
requirements.
Strain in the storage areas must not be so
large as to cause stope wall deformation
(spalling, wall strength disturbance).
Properties of
the rock
environment for
construction of
the
underground
part
The rock massif should not be subject to
appreciable tectonic effects resulting in brittle
and ductile rock deformations, a low degree
of metamorphosis and weathering.
Conditional to exclusion
Preference will be given to rocks with better
thermal conductivity properties and thermal
diffusivity (which directly affect the spatial
arrangement of the storage areas and hence,
the total repository dimensions).
A very unfavourable hydrogeological situation
at the site or in a part thereof may be a
reason for site exclusion from the list of
potential sites.
Above-ground
part
construction
feasibility
Comparison to
exclusion
The area where the above-ground part of
the repository is to be built must meet all
criteria for siting a nuclear facility on the
ground. Preference will be given to sites
with
a
better
usable
existing
infrastructure.
Occurrence of exogenic geodynamic effects
such as slope deformations (e.g. earth slips
and earth flows), plastic subsoil push-up.
Construction
stability
Comparison to exclusion
Occurrence of current or expected land
deformations due to gas, oil or water
extraction or to deep mining of minerals
which may endanger the rock massif stability
in the construction subsoil or overburden.
Load-bearing capacity lower than 0.2 MPa,
foundation ground with sagging or highly
swelling soil or with soil containing more than
3% organics, with a layer thickness
1
Indicator type shows if the indicator has values that may rule out the DGR siting altogether or make
its construction conditional on a technical measure or serves only as a site comparison criterion.
23
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
precluding its removal/replacement.
Geological conditions such as the presence
of water-bearing non-cohesive soil or soft
cohesive soil.
Presence of abandoned mines within the
narrow areas, with potential effects of
undermining,
mine-water
break-through
and/or
devastating effects
of
major
mine/mountain disturbances.
Raw material mining activities with potential
adverse effects on the construction/operation
of the facility or a part thereof.
Unfavourable properties of the foundation
soils, surrounding soils and rock at the site
Comparison to exclusion
Hydrogeological situation at the construction
land making it difficult to monitor and predict
groundwater behaviour.
Presence of aggressive groundwater with
potential contact with the building structures.
Presence of well-permeable soil and
groundwater level at a depth <2 m below the
expected coarse groundwork level.
High interstitial or fissure rock permeability
identified by geotechnological survey of the
underground areas.
Geological conditions equivalent to tunnel
construction driving degree 2.
Infrastructure
availability
Number and
complexity of
conflicts of
interests
Costs
Comparison
Preference will be given to a site with a better
available and usable infrastructure
Comparison to exclusion
The number of and complexity of reconciling
conflicts of interests with legal protection of
property, phenomena and objects present in
the area must be considered. This may
become an exclusion criterion if no
acceptable solution to the conflicts can be
found.
Comparison
From
among
solutions
that
are
satisfactory (with a reasonable degree of
conservativeness) from the safety and
technology aspects, preference will be
given to the solution that is also optimal
from the economic aspect.
24
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
6 Safety requirements, suitability indicators and criteria
6.1 Introduction
In order to assess the deep geological repository safety at the given site, all the safety
analyses performed by using verified and validated computer codes must be summarised
into the safety documentation (safety case). The assessment must be primarily based on the
set of arguments and evidence to defend the safety concept for each of the sites considered
(IAEA SSR 5 [25], requirement 6).
6.2 Long-term safety
The confining and isolating properties of the rock environment in combination with the
engineered barriers will ensure that irradiation of an individual from the critical population
group caused by the radioactive wastes stored by the DGR will not exceed the optimisation
limit of 0.25 mSv during a calendar year. In order to confine and isolate the radioactive
wastes, the rock environment must [25]:
1) Slow down radionuclide transport by the action of the physical and chemical
processes in the lithosphere – hold the radionuclides within the rock environment for
as long as possible ([25], requirement 8).
2) Protect the engineered barrier system through the stable and favourable rock
environment, support the engineered barriers’ confining capacity ([25], requirement
16).
3) Prevent inadvertent human intrusion to the wastes – isolate from the environment
([25], requirement 9).
Knowledge of the following site properties and characteristics is a prerequisite in order to be
able to assess how the safety functions of the rock environment are met during each site
selection stage:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
Site describability and predictability
Hydrogeological properties of the rock environment
Site stability
Likelihood of human intrusion into the repository
Compatibility of the rock environment with the proposed engineered barrier system
Rock environment's transport properties
6.2.1 Site describability and predictability
International concepts of DGRs consider “good describability” and “good predictability” to be
among the main criteria for the assessment of the potential sites (see, e.g., [33], [35], [46],
[47]).
The good spatial describability (characterisability, describability) requirement concerns, in
particular, reliability, accuracy and precision of the characteristics obtained for the geological
structure and variability of the properties within the site considered. The parameters must
make it possible to create credible, simple, well balanced and defensible descriptive 3D
models of the sites as basic data for long-term DGR safety assessment. A large volume of
25
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
data from the geo-science domain is required for this, and, importantly, the data must be
verifiable (traceable).
Site describability can be characterised as follows:
1) Uncertainty of the describability of the geological structure of and tectonic situation at
the sites (few lithological rock types, simple tectonic situation, etc.) low enough to
allow credible 3D geological models of the sites to be set up.
2) Uncertainty of the describability and predictability of the hydrogeological situation at
the sites low enough to allow credible 3D hydrogeological and transport models of the
sites to be set up.
3) Variability of the rock environment's physical, geomechanical and geochemical
properties low enough to allow credible 3D geomechanical and geochemical models
to be set up.
4) Applicability of standard geological survey methods, which is related to the availability
of data on the rock environment (small layer thickness or absence of overburden
formations, reach of the outcrop parts of the potential host environment, favourable
surface topography) and to the feasibility of adopting archived data with regard to the
time they were obtained and with regard to the purpose for which they were collected.
The site for the deep geological repository must be characterised down to the level of detail
adequate for understanding the site development at the given stage of site assessment and
preparation of feasibility studies and site safety assessment with an acceptably low
uncertainty.
The characteristics of the site must include its current status, its likely natural development,
and human plans and activities that may affect the safety of the repository for as long as the
wastes are dangerous.
The feasibility of site prediction based on in-depth understanding of the previous site
development is important. If the geological structure of the site is difficult to describe or if it
can be described and predicted with a low level of certainty only, then this is a reason why
any further geological survey of the site should rather be suspended or abandoned
altogether.
6.2.2 Hydrogeological site properties
Assessment of the groundwater flow mechanisms, such as the analysis of the flow direction
and flow velocity, constitutes one of the most important inputs for long-term site safety
assessment because entrainment by a groundwater flow is considered to be the most likely
route by which radionuclides would migrate to the environment.
Granitoid rocks are virtually impermeable and groundwater can flow only through fissures
(fracture permeability). Presence of water-bearing discontinuities in the rock is a very
important factor in the long-term DGR safety assessment. The specific DGR location at the
site must be optimised with respect to the occurrence of preferential pathways for
groundwater outflow from the repository to the environment (see [2], I.29).
The following 3 hydrogeological parameters can be regarded as most important for a rock
environment with fissure permeability:
26
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
1) Distance between the radioactive waste disposal areas and the water-bearing fault
zones.
2) Occurrence of open and intersecting brittle structures (fissures) in the waste disposal
areas (isolating section) of the rock environment.
3) Water flow velocity in the rock environment.
6.2.2.1 Distance between the waste disposal areas and any water-bearing
fault zones
Credible regional and local hydraulic models of the rock environment must be available for
assessment of the distance between the waste disposal areas (isolating section of the
repository) and any water-bearing fault zones that may serve as fast transport routes for
radionuclide escape to the environment. The identification of any open fault zones in the
outflow (drainage) section of the rock environment is particularly important.
The actual length of the transport routes from the waste disposal areas to the large waterbearing fault zones depends on how the water-bearing brittle structures are interconnected.
A repository must not be built at a site where the distance between the waste disposal areas
and the water-bearing fault structures is too small. The specific limiting values, though, will
depend on the fault zone nature and on the safety analysis results. The following crude
distances below which a repository cannot be built (exclusion criteria) are applied in Sweden
[31]: 100 m for regional fault zones and tens of metres for larger lower-degree local fault
zones. The method of determination of the specific values for the potential sites in the Czech
Republic will be addressed in the future updates of this methodological guideline once the
safety analyses at the sites are complete.
6.2.2.2 Occurrence of open brittle structures in the isolating section of the
rock environment
Any continuous water bearing brittle structures (fissures) can serve as transport routes for
migrating radionuclides. A high occurrence of such brittle structures in the rock environment
may indicate their higher continuity (communication) and faster radionuclide transport. This
property can be only estimated during the first phase of ground geological survey based on
analysis of the density of occurrence of the brittle structures in the exposed, superficial parts
of the rock environment and/or from in-situ experiments in underground laboratories in
similar rock types. In Sweden, the presence of a fissure longer than 10 m and wider than
0.1 m and intersecting a waste disposal borehole is considered an exclusion criterion [31].
The specific parameters for the potential sites in the Czech Republic will be included in the
future updates of the present document based on safety analyses at the sites.
6.2.2.3 Water flow velocity in the isolating section of the rock environment
For the confining role of the rock environment it is necessary that the groundwater velocity in
the rock environment's waste disposal section be very low. The mean hydraulic conductivity
of the rock massif at the depth of the repository (the isolating section of the rock
environment) should preferably be below 10-8 m/s and the hydraulic gradient should be lower
than 0.01 [31]. The specific water flow velocity levels at which / above which DGR siting is
27
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
not permissible will emerge from the safety analysis taking into account the properties of the
engineered barriers and the proposed repository design/layout.
6.2.3 Site stability
The geological structure of the site must ensure repository stability for a period no shorter
than 100,000 years2. The host environment for the deep geological repository should be
robust enough not to be affected by any future geodynamic processes and/or subsequent
phenomena or by other factors (such as climate change, neotectonic movements, high
seismicity) to an extent unacceptably disturbing the safety function of the entire waste
disposal system ([2], I.25). Existing insight [53] suggests that the following phenomena
should be considered in the Czech Republic:
1)
2)
3)
4)
Earthquake and presence of potentially active faults (seismic stability)
Uplift or depression of the ground (vertical movements of the Earth's crust)
Post-volcanic effects
Climate change
The effect of the changes caused by the construction of the repository must also be taken
into account when analysing stability of the site (and any other aspects).
6.2.3.1 Seismic stability
The requirements for seismic stability of the area where an above-ground nuclear facility
such as a nuclear power plant is to be sited are described in detail, e.g., in documents issued
by the State Office for Nuclear Safety [21], [63] and in the IAEA SSG-9 document [50].
However, as some publications suggest [37], [38], the effects of earthquakes and the
consequences of movements along potentially active faults can be very different between
constructions sited on the ground and constructions built underground. When assessing the
long-term repository safety at depths of hundreds of metres, the damaging effect of
earthquake on the disposal canisters is believed to be the most important factor. It is
conservatively assumed [37], [38] that an earthquake may also induce displacement along
the brittle structures intersecting the waste disposal boreholes, which then may, in the
extreme case, result in mechanical damage of the disposal canisters. An estimate of the
brittle structure displacement will be documented with data measured at the candidate sites
or at similar sites.
All the sites hitherto selected lie within seismically stable areas as stipulated by Regulation
No. 215/2002. Since the impacts of a seismo-tectonic event are always more severe on the
ground than underground, the following requirement, which is applied to nuclear facilities to
be sited on the ground [21], [40], can be considered very conservative for a facility built at a
depth of 500 m: An area with a nuclear facility must not be used for the siting if a fault that is
potentially capable of displacement with impacts on the ground or on layers near the ground
is present within the area or within a 5km distance from the boundary of the area (quotation
of the requirement3).
2
This is a crude time during which the overall spent nuclear fuel radioactivity would decrease down to
the level of uranium ore.
3
Draft SÚJB Regulation governing the siting of nuclear facilities.
28
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
6.2.3.2 Vertical movements of the Earth's crust
Vertical movements of the Earth's crust (uplifts, depressions) are manifestations of the
geodynamic activity of the top part of the Earth's crust. From the long-term point of view
(within the horizon of hundreds of thousands of years to a million years), land uplift or
differential movements at the site pose a potential hazard to the repository. Assuming a
continuous uplift velocity of 1 mm/year, the repository would be lifted up from the depth of
500 m in half a million years. Vertical movements of the Earth's crust are closely related to
other geodynamic processes and effects, such as seismicity of the area, activity of tectonic
faults or tectonically conditional slopes. Critical elements may also include different degrees
of uplift/depression within the site, usually associated with a fault zone (tectonic line) at the
site.
Low vertical movement intensities are indicated by flat areas with low erosion intensity.
Suitability of the site for the construction of the DGR can be assessed by taking into account
the degree of uplift/depression of the area against the neighbouring blocks, or the
morphology of the area or thickness of the quaternary sediments.
The site must also be free from tectonic lines for which movement activities and associated
differential movements potentially endangering integrity of the repository have been
demonstrated or are conceivable in the future. Some countries [33] do not permit a repository
to be sited in an area where movements of the Earth's crust may exceed 1 mm/year. If
necessary, the specific values for the potential sites in the Czech Republic will be a topic for
future updates of this methodological guideline based on the results of appropriate studies
and analyses.
6.2.3.3 Post-volcanic effects
The effect of post-volcanic effects on the repository is probably associated with a potentially
increased heat flow, presence of mineral and thermal waters, seismic effects and gas
emissions. A site where such effects exist must not be used for the construction of a deep
geological repository. However, such sites in the Czech Republic (which are associated with
certain areas only, e.g. with the Oherský rift region) have already been excluded from the
potential site list.
6.2.3.4 Climate stability
Global climate changes have been repeating cyclically during the youngest geological era –
the Quaternary (approximately 2.6 million years). The cyclic changes resulted in glacial
periods approximately 100,000 years long and interglacial periods approximately 20,000
years long. From the global point of view, the onset of the glacial period affects the formation,
spreading and parameters of glaciation, permafrost (permanently frozen soil) and extensive
changes in the hydrogeological and hydrological situation of the area, dynamics of
weathering and area denudation and the occurrence of flora and fauna, etc. Apart from the
external temperature, factors affecting the total permafrost depth include geographic location,
orientation of slopes, geothermal gradient, etc.. In today’s Czech Republic, permafrost
reached depths up to 250 m during the Pleistocene [51], [55]. Climate change predictions for
the next 100,000 years in the Nordic region indicate that the Czech Republic will very
probably lie beyond the reach of continental glaciation [64].
29
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
Some foreign programmes [64] also include the effect of warming due to increasing CO 2
levels. This however, would be a global effect, and no exclusion or conditional criterion for
deep geological repository site selection can be postulated in this respect. A territory as small
as the Czech Republic is not expected to be composed of areas exhibiting mutually different
climate change effects
6.2.4 Factors increasing the likelihood of human intrusion into the repository
Requirements regarding the risk of human intrusion into the repository are formulated in
IAEA recommendation [2], paragraphs I.36 to I.40, and are aimed exclusively at inadvertent
human intrusion. The likelihood of intrusion can be reduced based on analysis and meeting
the following indicators:
1) No enumeration of resources or definition of prognosed mineral resources whose
survey might bring about intrusion into the repository will exist in the isolating section
of the repository.
2) The site properties are not favourable for the extraction of groundwater or geothermal
energy.
3) No boreholes deeper than 300 m to explore the presence of any mineral resources
were made in the past and no abandoned mines are present in the isolating section
of the repository and/or in its nearest vicinity. (This is an auxiliary indicator for
assessment of previous interest in a site for a future repository).
Presence of the above factors (mineral deposits, significant groundwater resources, old
mines), which increase the likelihood of human intrusion into the repository and may result in
exposure of an individual who inadvertently gets in contact with the wastes must be analysed
to ascertain if they are not too serious to rule out construction of the repository at that site.
6.2.5
Compatibility of the rock environment with the engineered barrier
system designed
IAEA recommendations [25], stipulate (requirement 16) that the rock environment must be
physically and chemically compatible with the proposed engineered barriers and with the
design of the repository. Site assessment with respect to safety must always be made for the
specific repository design and engineered barrier system, which in the Czech concept
includes the following items:
1) Stable form of the wastes, from which radionuclides are only very slowly released
2) Disposal canisters whose lifetime is no shorter than 10,000 years
3) A buffering, filling and sealing system, typically consisting of compacted bentonite or
its mixtures with inert materials and ensuring that:
 neither water nor any other corrosion-accelerating substances, including
microorganisms, can get to the disposal canisters by any route other than
diffusion
 any strain changes at the site due to rock movement will be buffered by the
plasticity of bentonite
 if the radionuclides are released from the disposal canisters, their migration
will be slowed down by diffusion through the bentonite barrier
 all free openings to the waste disposal areas will be sealed.
30
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
Compatibility of the rock environment with the engineered barrier system and with the
repository design can be divided with respect to the basic rock environment properties that
may affect the performance properties of the engineered barriers, viz.:






Thermal properties
Hydraulic properties
Mechanical properties
Chemical properties
Microbiological properties
Gas permeability
Potential synergism must also be considered when analysing each of the mechanisms of
interaction between the rock environment and the engineered barriers. If the engineered
barriers are not compatible with the rock environment, then the site may be excluded or else
a different, acceptable technical solution may be used. However, it will be difficult to
differentiate between the sites with respect to their compatibility with the engineered barriers
during the first site selection stage till 2020 because the majority of requisite data will be from
the depth of the repository. The parameters for the safety analyses will have to be estimated
based on data from similar Czech and foreign sites or from in-situ experiments in
underground laboratories.
6.2.5.1 Thermal properties
The thermal gradient, thermal properties of the rocks and the mean surface temperature are
important rock parameters affecting the repository design, final maximum engineered barrier
temperature and, thereby, their degradation rate. The disposal canister/bentonite interface
temperature is considered to be the critical parameter, which should not exceed 100°C in
order to prevent acceleration of the bentonite/disposal canister degradation processes.
Moreover, the processes occurring in the repository are more complex and more difficult to
evaluate at temperatures above 100°C.
6.2.5.2 Hydraulic properties
Water flow velocity in the rock environment of the isolating section of the repository should
be low for the engineered barrier degradation process to remain at a low level. The rate of
degradation of the disposal canisters and, subsequently, of the wastes inside may be directly
dependent on the amount of water that will diffuse through the bentonite to get in contact with
the canisters/wastes. Any waste disposal boreholes that are intersected by water-bearing
brittle structures with appreciable water flows that might bring about bentonite erosion must
be excluded.
6.2.5.3 Mechanical properties
The rock massif is subject to strain the magnitude and changes of which may result in
instability; this applies, in particular, to mined/excavated areas (tunnels, boreholes).
The following properties and parameters will be examined when assessing the rock
environment quality:
31
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
1) Rock strength and deformation properties, which should be “standard” and, as far as
possible, homogeneous within the host environment.
2) Tectonic phenomena acting on the rock block (brittle and ductile rock deformations,
degree of metamorphosis) should be as low as possible.
3) Strain should not reach “extreme” levels and should be isotropic as much as possible.
Strain in the waste disposal areas must not reach levels that might bring about wall
deformations (spalling – wall strength degradation).
Such unfavourable mechanical properties resulting in wall damage are unacceptable: either
a technological approach is devised to eliminate this effect or the repository cannot be sited
there.
6.2.5.4 Geochemical properties
Degradation of the engineered barriers is closely related to chemical processes occurring
when the engineered barriers get in contact with groundwater. The basic safety requirement
postulated by the Czech DGR safety concept is that a reductive environment is attained
rapidly in the repository after its closure. Hence, no preferential routes that might result in
oxygen penetration into the waste disposal areas once the repository has been closed are
permissible. The pH value is also important: it should not differ from normal groundwater pH
levels in the crystalline environment.
Also desirable is that the groundwater does not contain appreciable concentrations of
substances that may accelerate the barrier degradation process or the waste species
dissolution process. This concerns, for instance, chlorides, sulphides and carbonates with
their adverse effect on the disposal casks.
With respect to the safety function of bentonite, important factors include the divalent-tounivalent ion ratio which plays a role in the reduction of the formation of colloids, which may
affect adversely radionuclide migration. Potassium ion concentration plays a role in the longterm bentonite stability at elevated temperatures.
Occurrence of extreme geochemical conditions in the isolating section of the repository, such
as the presence of brines, may rule out repository siting in the area.
6.2.5.5 Microbiological properties
Microbiological properties of the rock environment are very important particularly with respect
to the disposal canister degradation rate. The safety analysis must include microbial activity
in the rock environment during the various repository development stages and impact of the
microbial activity on the geochemical conditions in the repository and on the degradation rate
of the disposal canisters and other components of the waste disposal system.
6.2.5.6 Gas permeability
Degradation of metallic wastes or metallic disposal canisters may be associated with the
production of gases (hydrogen in particular), which may affect the properties of both the
engineered barriers and the rock environment. So it is important that the rock environment in
the RAW disposal areas be adequately permeable to gases. This rock environment property
may also be important when selecting the disposal canister type. It must be demonstrated
32
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
that the accumulation of gases produced by the waste / engineered barrier degradation
processes will not endanger the safety functions of the engineered barriers or of the rock
environment.
6.2.6 Transport properties of the rock environment
Advective transport of the various radionuclide species with the flowing water is affected by a
number of processes such as their precipitation, dissolution, diffusion, sorption or dilution by
mixing with non-contaminated water.
Assessment of the rock environment's transport properties will target the following rock
environment properties:



Duration of radionuclide transport and retardation
Radionuclide species solubility in groundwater
Radionuclide concentration decrease by dispersion and dilution with the noncontaminated waters
During the first stage of the site selection process (short-list preparation), the input data for
the safety analyses will be estimated based on local geological and hydrogeological models,
set up based on site ground survey data, data from similar sites and in-situ experiments in
underground laboratories.
For instance, the concentrations of some radioisotopes that are used to determine the age of
waters in the isolating section of the rock environment is a suitable indicator of slow
radionuclide transport to the environment.
Identification of the existence of preferential routes in the rock environment enabling fast
radionuclide transport to the environment is a reason to exclude the site from the list of
potential DGR sites.
6.2.6.1 Radionuclide transport and retardation times
The duration of radionuclide transport through the network of fissures in the crystalline rock
environment is primarily determined by the ratio of the transport route length to the Darcy
velocity multiplied by kinematic porosity. The transport route length calculation must be
based on the sum of the transport route segments as obtained from the results of the
detailed hydrogeological and transport models and identification of the probable transport
routes. The radionuclide transport duration is also dependent on radionuclide motion
retardation that may occur due to radionuclide migration into the rock matrix or sorption on
the surfaces of fissures or their filling.
6.2.6.2 Radionuclide solubility in groundwater
The maximum radionuclide concentration during advective transport is affected, in addition to
sorption, also by radionuclide precipitation in the groundwater. This property is specific for
each radionuclide species. For many radionuclides, the primary factors affecting their
solubility and thus their maximum concentration include the groundwater Eh and pH levels
and presence of some complexing substances or colloids.
33
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
6.2.6.3 Dilution by mixing with non-contaminated water
Contaminated water mixing with non-contaminated water is one of the important factors
affecting the radionuclide transport from the repository to the environment. This parameter,
though, possesses a lower weight when assessing the transport properties of the site and
safety of the repository because the change in the hydraulic conditions in the surface layers
of the site during thousands of years cannot be predicted.
6.3 Summary of suitability indicators for site assessment from the
long-term safety aspect
Table 3 below summarises the long-term safety assessment criteria. The table also shows
the nature of each criterion – if it is an exclusion, conditional or comparison criterion.
Table 3: Summary of suitability indicators for site assessment from the DGR long-term safety aspect
Requirement4
/ suitability
indicator type
Description
Comparison
to exclusion
Repository siting is ruled out if the site
description
and
development
prediction carry a high degree of
uncertainty. Sites for which validatable
3D descriptive models cannot be set up
will be excluded.
Describability of the geological
structure and tectonic situation
Exclusion
Infeasibility of setting up a credible5,
comprehensive 3D geological model (too
many lithological rock types, too complex
tectonic situation, etc.)
Describability and
predictability of the
hydrogeological situation
Exclusion
Infeasibility of setting up a credible
hydrogeological model of the site
Variability of the physical,
geomechanical and
geochemical properties of the
rock environment
Exclusion
Infeasibility of setting up credible
geomechanical and geochemical models
Applicability of standard
geological survey methods
Comparison
Preference is given to sites where
standard geological survey methods are
applicable.
Requirement / suitability
indicator
Site describability and
predictability
4
Indicator type shows if the indicator has values that may rule out the DGR siting altogether or make
its construction conditional on a technical measure or serves only as a site comparison criterion.
5
Verified by independent experts.
34
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
Hydrogeological properties
of the rock environment
Comparison
to exclusion
Preference is given to sites with better
hydrogeological conditions. Unsuitable
hydrogeological properties with a high
permeability and high water flow
velocities rule out siting the repository
there.
Distance between the waste
disposal areas and waterbearing fault zones.
Conditional to
exclusion
Tens to hundreds of metres depending on
the fault zone nature.
Occurrence of open and brittle
structures in the rock
environment.
Conditional to
exclusion
This parameter rules out waste disposal
boreholes in areas intersected by
pronounced open brittle structures.
Preference will be given to sites where a
lower density of open brittle structures can
be expected at the repository depth.
Water flow velocity in the
isolating section of the rock
environment.
Conditional to
exclusion
Preference will be given to sites with a
mean hydraulic conductivity <10-8 and
hydraulic gradient <0.01 in the waste
disposal areas.
Comparison
to exclusion
A site with a high probability of
processes or events endangering the
rock environment's safety function to
confine and isolate the wastes (high
earthquake/vertical
movement
magnitude, presence of post-volcanic
phenomena, climate change with indepth reach) will be excluded from the
potential site list.
Site stability
Earthquake and presence of
potentially active fractures
(seismic stability)
Comparison to
exclusion
An area with a nuclear facility must not be
used for the siting if a fault that is
potentially capable of displacement with
impacts on the ground or on layers near
the ground is present within the area or
within a 5km distance from the boundary
of the area.
The maximum potential magnitude values
and the values of soil oscillation
acceleration with a frequency may be used
to compare the sites.
Area surface depression or
uplift (vertical movements of
the Earth's crust)
Post-volcanic effects
Exclusion
Sites where the rate of vertical movements
of the Earth's crust exceeds the limit of
1 mm/year will be excluded from the list.
Exclusion
Sites where post-volcanic effects (gas
emanations, hot water, etc.) are present
will be excluded from the list.
35
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
Comparison
Climate stability is not an exclusion
criterion. Preference will be given to sites
where the expected climate change has
lower impacts on the conditions at the site,
particularly on the hydrogeological and
hydrological situation.
Comparison
to exclusion
A site with factors that increase the
likelihood of human intrusion into the
repository
(presence
of
mineral
deposits,
significant
groundwater
resources, abandoned mines) and may
result in exposure of an individual who
inadvertently got in contact with the
wastes will be excluded from the list.
Presence of mineral resources
Exclusion
No mineral resources must be registered
at a depth larger than a few tens of
metres, in the isolating section of the
repository or in its nearest surroundings.
Presence of groundwater or
geothermal energy resources
Exclusion
The rock environment must not contain
significant water or geothermal energy
resources.
Comparison
Preference is given to sites with fewer
boreholes over 300 m deep and/or with no
abandoned mines present. Old mines
must be adequately far from the isolating
section of the repository and its nearest
surroundings.
Compatibility of the rock
environment with the
engineered barrier system
designed
Conditional to
exclusion
The rock environment must provide
favourable conditions for the safety
functions of the engineered barriers.
Preference will be given to sites that
will require no very costly technical
provisions
or
costly
engineered
barriers. Sites where compatibility with
the engineered barriers cannot be
achieved at a reasonable cost will be
excluded from the list.
Thermal properties
Comparison
Preference will be given to sites with a
lower mean ambient temperature and with
properties favourable for heat removal .
Hydraulic properties
Conditional to
exclusion
Waste disposal area with appreciably
unfavourable hydraulic properties, which
are intersected by a water-bearing brittle
structure with appreciable water inflow
must be excluded.
Mechanical properties
Conditional to
exclusion
Unfavourable
mechanical
properties
resulting in waste disposal borehole wall
damage may rule out the DGR siting if no
suitable technical solution is available.
Climate change
Factors increasing the
likelihood of human
intrusion into the repository
Factors indicating past human
intrusion into the rock
environment
36
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
Comparison to
exclusion
Only very extreme geochemical properties
of the groundwater (e.g. presence of brine)
may rule out the DGR siting.
Comparison
Preference will be given to sites free from
appreciable microbial activity, especially
free from microorganisms accelerating
corrosion of the disposal canisters.
Conditional
If the rock environment possesses a low
gas permeability, the design must include
provisions to prevent accumulation of
appreciable gas volumes (e.g. by reducing
the amount of ferrous materials in the
repository).
Transport properties of the
rock environment
Conditional to
exclusion
A site will be excluded from the list if
preferential routes are identified in the
rock
environment
such
that
radionuclide
migration
may
be
associated with total effective doses
exceeding the limit of 0.25 mSv/year for
an
individual
from
the
critical
population group even if technical
measures to counteract this (e.g. better
disposal canisters or larger bentonite
thickness) are adopted.
Radionuclide transport and
retardation times
Comparison to
exclusion
A site will be excluded from the list if
preferential routes with potentially fast
radionuclide
penetration
into
the
environment are identified.
Comparison
Preference will be given to sites with
groundwater whose composition does not
support high radionuclide mobility.
Comparison
The dilution levels arising from mixing with
non-contaminated water constitute an
auxiliary criterion when comparing the
transport properties of the sites.
Geochemical properties
Microbiological properties
Gas permeability
Radionuclide solubility in
groundwater
Dilution by mixing with noncontaminated water
6.4 Operational safety
The fact must be taken into account when designing a deep geological repository that the
repository is both a nuclear facility and a facility of a mine nature. The project is also specific
in that the repository construction activities and radioactive waste disposal activities will
occur simultaneously at the waste disposal horizon. Those basic requirements must be taken
into account when preparing the technical solution and assessing its operational safety [21],
[39], [40], [41].
Operational safety and compliance with applicable regulations must always be ensured at an
adequate level irrespective of the site selected.
The following operational safety requirements must be satisfied:
1) Radiation protection ensured during any SNF and RAW handling operation.
37
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
2) General as well as specific mining safety during the repository construction and
operation phases ensured.
Assessment of the sites based on the above parameters can only be done once the specific
technical solution of each site is available. Safety analyses of the individual jobs and
operations must be performed in parallel to the development of each system so that
feedback is obtained and can be implemented into the solution.
6.4.1 Radiation protection
The safe workplace operation conditions must be ensured during every repository operation
stage that is associated with radiation-handling activities. The conditions are defined by
legislation, specifically by SÚJB Regulation No. 307/2002 on radiation protection.
It must be demonstrated that:
1) The safe operations conditions at workplaces where radiation-handling activities are
performed will be maintained as stipulated by Part Two, Title I of Regulation No.
307/2002, so that exposure of humans should be as low as reasonably achievable as
per Part One of Title IV, Article 17 of the Regulation.
2) The exposure limits specified in Articles 18 - 22 of Regulation No. 307/2002 will be
complied with.
3) The optimisation limit for safe radioactive waste disposal, i.e. the effective dose to an
individual from the critical population group, i.e. 0.25 mSv during a calendar year as
specified in Article 52 of Regulation No. 307/2002, will be complied with.
The nuclear facility design must take into account the properties of the site and, in particular,
comply with the requirements of Regulation No. 215/1997. Furthermore, every nuclear facility
must be designed so that the basic safety functions are not endangered during natural
phenomena that cannot be practically eliminated (earthquake,,storm, flood, extreme ambient
temperatures, precipitation in any form, moisture/humidity, icy conditions, flora and fauna
effects,...) or during phenomena induced by human activity inside or outside the nuclear
facility that cannot be fully ruled out (explosions, fires, aircraft drop, traffic accidents,
industrial accidents near the nuclear facility, electromagnetic interferences or other impacts
of technical equipment existing beyond the nuclear facility, ...).
Fast and easy intervention must be possible in case of accident/emergency, such as fast
arrival of the fire brigade, information/evacuation of the employees and the population, etc.
Operational safety demonstration depends on the technical solution adopted. No event
scenarios can be set up, nor can the consequences of various types of accident be
evaluated, if no specific technical solution is available. Safety assessment must be
performed both for normal operation conditions, for abnormal operation conditions, and for
those design-basis accidents that might have the most severe impact on the environment
and the public. The impacts of severe accidents must be assessed as well.
6.4.2 Ensuring general as well as specific mining safety during the repository
construction and operation phases
The possibility must exist to implement all the required safety provisions (stipulated by
legislation and by competent authorities) during the construction and operation of the deep
38
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
geological repository in the existing geological-mining conditions. Compliance with this
requirement must be ensured by the technical solution and in the existing geological
conditions. The issues of occupational safety and health protection at work in mine
conditions are governed by applicable legislation. Safety during the facility construction and
operation and compliance with applicable regulations must be ensured at the appropriate
level irrespective of the site selected.
The technical solution must demonstrate that all the requirements are met. Non-standard
conditions that may occur during the facility construction and operation must be considered,
and the risks and implementability of the appropriate remedial action must be assessed.
The facility must be sited in rocks that are well suited to the construction of underground
structures.
The repository must not be endangered by a disproportionate risk of fire, explosions or the
effect of combustion products, all of which give rise to unwanted radionuclide migration.
Provisions for fast and easy intervention in case of accident or emergency must be adopted,
including, e.g. fast arrival of the fire brigade / mining rescue service / medical rescue service,
employee information and evacuation, etc.
39
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
6.5 Summary of suitability indicators for site assessment from the
DGR operational safety aspect
Table 4: Summary of the requirements and suitability indicators for site assessment with respect to
nuclear safety, radiation protection and mine safety
Requirement /
suitability
indicator type
Description
Exclusion
Attainment of the limits for the
mean annual effective radiation
doses to an individual from the
critical group of the population
and employees.
Radiation protection of the public
Exclusion
Exceeded or attained limits of the
mean annual effective dose to an
individual from the critical population
group.
Radiation protection of the
employees
Exclusion
Exceeded or attained limits of the
mean annual effective dose to the
employees.
Requirement / suitability
indicator
Radiation protection of the
employees and the public
Ensuring conventional and mine Conditional to
safety
exclusion
Failure to meet all requirements
to ensure occupational safety.
Ensuring conventional safety
Conditional
Failure to meet all requirements to
ensure occupational safety.
Ensuring mine safety
Conditional to
exclusion
Failure to meet all requirements to
ensure mine safety.
Exclusion
Situation where the necessary
measures to protect the public
during/after a radiation accident
at the facility or a workplace
cannot be immediately and/or
fully implemented, particularly
because of existing population
distribution and presence of
residential
houses/areas.
Situation where remedial action
during or after an emergency –
fast arrival of the fire brigade /
mine rescue service / medical
rescue service and/or employee
information/evacuation – cannot
be ensured.
Factors limiting the possibility
to implement the emergency
plan or emergency intervention
from the mine safety aspect
40
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
External natural risks
Attained or exceeded maximum
calculation earthquake intensity of 8
on the MSK-64 scale.
Exclusion
Earthquake
Comparison
The maximum potential magnitude
value and the value of the soil
oscillation
acceleration
with
frequency may be used when
comparing the various potential
sites.
Exclusion
The site must not be used for the
repository if a fault that is potentially
capable of displacement with
manifestations on the ground or in
the near-ground layers is present
within the area or within a 5km
distance from the boundary of the
area.
Exclusion
The site must not be used for the
repository if any effects of postvolcanic activity were identified
within the area.
Floods and flood waves
Exclusion
The area selected for siting the
facility must not encroach on flood
areas of watercourses that are
flooded at Q100 or on areas that
may be flooded in the event of
water-management
facility
failure/accident.
Extreme weather effects
Comparison
Long-term weather data may be
used to compare the sites.
Conditional
Occurrence
of
exceptionally
unfavourable conditions for effluent
dispersion into the atmosphere
especially given by the morphology
of the site vicinity zones.
Occurrence of fault zones that are
active from the movement and
seismicity aspects
Post-volcanic activities
Dispersion conditions
External effects caused by humans
Aircraft accidents
Conditional
41
Possibility of aircraft crash on the
facility with effects exceeding the
building resistance with a probability
>10-7/year.
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
The area for siting must not
encroach on the protective zones of
motorways,
railways,
industrial
plants,
energy
sources,
gas
pipelines, oil pipelines, product
pipelines,
underground storage
tanks, airports (particularly their
take-off and landing areas).
Exclusion
Fire, explosion
Conditional
Water resource protection zones
Registration symbol:
The areas selected for siting must
not include continuously afforested
areas where forest fire might
endanger the facility/workplace, its
operation or personnel.
Siting of the facility is not permitted
in
areas
where
significant
groundwater or mineral water
resources are present and where
construction and/or operation of the
facility would permanently disturb
the water quality due to radioactivity.
Exclusion
Electromagnetic interferences
Conditional
Presence of broadcasting and/or
television transmitters and their
protective zones within the area
selected for siting.
Factors reducing protection
against sabotage
Conditional
Installation of physical security
elements and their use for guarding
the DGR structure.
42
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
7 Environmental
and criteria
requirements,
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
suitability
indicators
Environmental impact assessment (EIA) and assessment of the impacts on the population
must be made before the DGR can be built. It is assumed that the affected area as defined
by Act No. 100/2001 on environmental assessment [10] will consist of areas intended for the
construction of the above-ground part of the DGR and related and auxiliary buildings,
including areas for the construction site equipment and related planned infrastructure. The
area for which the EIA will be made will be wider, depending on the extent of environmental
impacts. Roughly, the potential impacts will be analysed within an area covering units to tens
of kilometres (including considerations on potential trans-boundary impacts). The description
of impacts just for a comparison of the potential sites for the DGR (particularly during the
introductory project preparation stage), however, will concern a narrower interest area of the
above-ground facility at distances of their minimum expected reach.
According to IAEA recommendation ([2] SSG 14, I.44 to I.47), siting of a deep geological
repository should be designed so that the quality of the environment will be adequately
protected and potential adverse impacts can be mitigated to an acceptable level with respect
to technical, economic, social and environmental factors. The repository siting should not be
in evident conflict of interests that are difficult to reconcile within the area assessed,
indicating very significant long-term endangerment or excessive damage of very sensitive
ecosystems and deterioration of the status of the components of the environment with direct,
demonstrably adverse impacts on human health.
This may be a conditional to exclusion criterion regarding construction of the deep geological
repository at the site in question. The decision as to whether some conditions require
implementation of a measure or not or if they even rule out siting of the DGR or its aboveground part within the area altogether will depend on the outcome of expert studies analysing
the repository's environmental impacts in line with applicable Czech legislation.
The studies will be performed with the aim to map and revise, in an unbiased manner, the
current status, and based on the outcome, to compare the suitability (degree of risks) of the
siting for the potential sites and their nearest potentially affected surroundings.
The comparison between the sites will be based, in particular, on the following site
properties:
1) Deterioration of the environment due to mining activities and other industrial DGR
operations.
2) Impacts on areas of important public values, especially on legally protected areas
(national parks, reserves, areas of special scientific or cultural interest and historical
areas).
3) Impairment of water supply and vulnerability of existing surface water and
groundwater resources.
4) Impacts on the landscape.
5) Impacts on the life of plants and animals (endangered species in particular).
6) Impacts on the economy of regions and municipalities.
7) Impacts on the development of the infrastructure of regions and municipalities.
8) Impacts on the prices of land and real estate.
9) Impacts on the area's recreational potential.
43
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
Only in a few cases is it possible, a priori to apply environmental exclusion criteria, viz. if the
area includes some of the following:





UNESCO biosphere reserve (Article 1 of Ministry of Foreign Affairs Notification
No. 159/1991, Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and
Natural Heritage),
National Parks – zones I and II,
Protected Landscape Areas – zones I and II,
National Natural Reserves, National Natural Park or Natural Reserve or Natural Park,
Sites of European Importance.
The question will have to be addressed as to whether the above exclusion criteria also apply
to the underground part of the repository at a depth of hundreds of metres under a
specifically protected area (e.g. 69]).
Sites/biotopes hosting endangered or highly endangered plant and animal species can be
considered conditionally suitable. Land habitats that have been mapped within the Czech
Republic will have to be taken into consideration, perhaps within the context of applicable
European legislation.
7.1 Summary of environmental suitability indicators
Table 5 below summarises the non-radiological environmental requirements and suitability
indicators6.
Table 5: Summary of the environmental criteria
Requirement / suitability
indicator type
Description
Exclusion
The above-ground part of the DGR
must not be sited in an area that
includes a Biosphere Reserve,
National Park zones I and/or II,
Protected Landscape Area zones I
and/or
II,
Site
of
European
Importance,
National
Natural
Reserve, National Natural Park (or a
Natural Reserve or Natural Park).
Presence of a
UNESCO Biosphere
Reserve
Exclusion
The above-ground part of the DGR
must not be sited in an area that
includes a UNESCO
Biosphere
Reserve (Article 1 of Ministry of
Foreign
Affairs
Notification
No.
159/1991, Convention Concerning the
Protection of the World Cultural and
Natural Heritage).
Presence of National
Park zones I and/or II
Exclusion
The above-ground part of the DGR
must not be sited in an area that
Requirement
Occurrence of
specially protected
nature areas
6
Radiation impacts and impacts of radioactive waste handling also fall among environmental criteria
but are not included in this table because they were analysed in detail in the previous sections of this
document.
44
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
includes zones I and/or II of a National
Park.
Presence of a
Protected Landscape
Area zone I
Presence of a National
Natural Reserve or a
National Natural Park
Presence of a Site of
European Importance
Presence of a Natural
Reserve or a Natural
Park
Exclusion
The above-ground part of the DGR
must not be sited in an area that
includes zones I and/or II of a
Protected Landscape Area.
Exclusion
The above-ground part of the DGR
must not be sited in an area that
includes a National Natural Reserve or
a National Natural Park (all those are
Specially Protected Nature Areas).
Exclusion
The above-ground part of the DGR
must not be sited in an area that
includes
a
Site
of
European
Importance.
Conditional
The above-ground part of the DGR
should not be sited in an area that
includes a Natural Reserve or a Natural
Park; however, in view of the
importance of the facility, this criterion
can be regarded as conditional if
appropriate protection measures are
feasible.
Assessment of the
impacts of the DGR
construction and
Comparison to exclusion
operation on the
population and
environmental factors
Preference will be given to sites with
better acceptable impacts on the
environment and public health
during
the
DGR
preparation,
construction and operation stages,
assessed based on expert opinions.
Impacts on surface
waters and
groundwater
Comparison to exclusion
Preference will be given to sites with
better
acceptable
impacts
on
groundwater. The repository must not
be sited in an area where the adverse
impacts
of
repository
construction/operation
cannot
be
mitigated to an acceptable level.
Comparison to exclusion
Preference will be given to sites with
better acceptable impacts on the
climate/air. The repository must not be
sited in an area where the adverse
impacts
of
repository
construction/operation
cannot
be
mitigated to an acceptable level.
Impact on the
climate/air
45
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
Impact on the sound
conditions
Impacts on the rock
environment and
natural resources
Impacts on public
health
Impacts on geological
and paleontological
monuments
Impacts on the fauna,
flora and ecosystems
Impacts on soil
Impacts on the
landscape
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
Comparison to exclusion
Preference will be given to sites with
better acceptable impacts on the sound
conditions (noise). The repository must
not be sited in an area where the
adverse
impacts
of
repository
construction/operation
cannot
be
mitigated to an acceptable level.
Comparison to exclusion
Preference will be given to sites with
better acceptable impacts on the rock
environment and natural resources.
The repository must not be sited in an
area where the adverse impacts of
repository
construction/operation
cannot be mitigated to an acceptable
level.
Comparison to exclusion
Preference will be given to sites with
better acceptable impacts on public
health. The repository must not be
sited in an area where the adverse
impacts
of
repository
construction/operation
cannot
be
mitigated to an acceptable level.
Comparison to exclusion
Preference will be given to sites with
better acceptable impacts on public
health. The repository must not be
sited in an area where the adverse
impacts
of
repository
construction/operation
cannot
be
mitigated to an acceptable level.
Comparison to exclusion
Preference will be given to sites with
better acceptable impacts on the fauna,
flora and ecosystems. The repository
must not be sited in an area where the
adverse
impacts
of
repository
construction/operation
cannot
be
mitigated to an acceptable level.
Comparison to exclusion
Preference will be given to sites with
better acceptable impacts on soil. The
repository must not be sited in an area
where the adverse impacts of
repository
construction/operation
cannot be mitigated to an acceptable
level.
Comparison to exclusion
Preference will be given to sites with
better acceptable impacts on the
landscape. The repository must not be
sited in an area where the adverse
impacts
of
repository
construction/operation
cannot
be
mitigated to an acceptable level.
46
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
Impact on
internationally valued
biotopes and sites (e.g. Comparison to exclusion
wetlands, forests,
arable land)
Preference will be given to sites with
better
acceptable
impacts
on
internationally valued biotopes and
sites (e.g. wetlands, forests, arable
land). The repository must not be sited
in an area where the adverse impacts
of repository construction/operation
cannot be mitigated to an acceptable
level.
Impacts on tangible
property and cultural
heritage
Comparison to exclusion
Preference will be given to sites with
better acceptable impacts on tangible
property and cultural heritage. The
repository must not be sited in an area
where the adverse impacts of
repository
construction/operation
cannot be mitigated to an acceptable
level.
Comparison to conditional
Preference will be given to sites with
better acceptable impacts on the
transport
infrastructure
or
other
infrastructure.
Impacts of nonradioactive waste
handling
Comparison to exclusion
Preference will be given to sites with
better acceptable impacts on the fauna,
flora and ecosystems. The repository
must not be sited in an area where the
adverse
impacts
of
repository
construction/operation
cannot
be
mitigated to an acceptable level.
Impacts on energy
consumption
Comparison to conditional
Preference will be given to sites with
better acceptable impacts on the fauna,
flora and ecosystems.
Impacts on raw material
consumption and
Comparison to conditional
deposits
Preference will be given to sites with
better acceptable impacts on raw
material consumption and deposits.
Impacts on the use of
the area affected
Comparison to conditional
Preference will be given to sites with
better acceptable impacts on the use of
the area affected.
Impacts on the living
conditions
Comparison to
conditional
Impacts on the
transport infrastructure
or other infrastructure
Preference will be given to sites with
better acceptable impacts on the
living conditions.
Impacts on the
economy of the regions Comparison to conditional
and municipalities
Preference will be given to sites with
better acceptable impacts on the
economy
of
the
regions
and
municipalities.
Impacts on
infrastructure
development
Preference will be given to sites with
better
acceptable
impacts
on
infrastructure development.
Comparison to conditional
47
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
Impacts on the prices of
real estate (including
Comparison to conditional
land) within the region
Preference will be given to sites with
better acceptable impacts on the prices
of real estate within the region.
Impacts on the area’s
recreational potential
Preference will be given to sites with
better acceptable impacts on the area’s
recreational potential.
Comparison to conditional
48
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
8 SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASPECTS
It is evident that the project of deep geological repository for spent nuclear fuel and
radioactive wastes has appreciable impacts on the interests and attitudes of local population
as well as local and regional political representatives. As foreign experience also shows,
reaching consensus with the local population, with the affected municipalities, is one of the
basic criteria. Only if the project is designed so that the maximum possible agreement with
local interests is achieved, if it offers cooperation, site development and financial and other
benefits, is there a chance that its implementation will be successful and consensus will be
reached.
The deep geological repository is also a project whose significance extends over Czech
national borders. According to the Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management
and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management [43], consultations with the parties to
the convention that may be affected by the facility are important, and the parties must be
provided with basic information on the facility enabling them to assess the likely impacts on
their territories.
The process of selection of two candidate sites (expected to be complete by 2020) will
include getting the stances maintained by the affected municipalities. The proposal for the
candidate sites along with the opinions will then be submitted to the Czech government.
From this point of view, the process can only be successful if it is transparent and if the
public as a stakeholder is invited to actively participate in the solution.
Transparency of the process, with active participation of the affected municipalities and the
public in line with Council Directive 2011/70/Euratom [23] and with the recommendations of
the European Nuclear Forum working groups, is a prerequisite for reaching a successful and
sustainable decision on the selection of the site for the deep geological repository. This
transparency will be supported by the creation of a legal framework with a clearly specified
role of the municipalities in the site selection process. Work done so far and transformation of
the Working Group on Dialogue on the Deep Geological Repository [72] to report to the
Governmental Council for Energy and Raw Material Strategy constitute a fundamental step
in this process.
A number of factors may contribute to the transparency of the decision-making process.
Transparency should be introduced into the decision-making process, the institutional
framework and the negotiations [70].
The following must be done to ensure transparency of the site selection process and
participation of the public affected:
1) Clarify the mechanism of processing the work results and discuss extension of the
scope of the Working Group on Dialogue on the Deep Geological Repository within
the Governmental Council for Energy and Raw Material Strategy.
2) Set up local working groups at each site under the umbrella of the existing Working
Group.
3) Procure adequate funds for the activity of the Working Group (independent
committee) and of the subgroups directly at the sites.
4) Ensure preparation of supporting development programmes at the sites: Based on
the socio-economic study that is in the preparatory phase now it will be possible to
identify areas and specific socio-economic factors at each site, to be further
49
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
developed and improved. This long-term site development programme will be
developed by the “local working groups”, which should be set up based on the
updated Concept in 2014 [71]. The groups may target the infrastructure, demographic
issues, regional development, education, standard of living and other topics that will
be their priority interests.
It is just the Working Group on Dialogue that may become one of the guarantors of a
transparent approach to the assessment and selection of the site for the deep geological
repository.
8.1 Role of the Working Group on Dialogue in the decision-making
process
The technical requirements, suitability indicators and criteria regarding the safety, design
approach and impacts on the environment and on the living conditions at the site must be
well documented, describable and quantifiable.
However, preparation of the deep geological repository is also associated with a number of
unquantifiable public concerns because this is a long-term process and a nuclear facility is
involved.. Hence, psychological effects, such as a disturbed status quo and concerns arising
from the existence of the repository must also be taken into consideration when selecting the
site. All those aspect affect the degree of repository acceptability by the towns and villages
affected.
Thus the degree of acceptability is one of the important indicators in the decision-making
process. Important factors of the degree of acceptability include, for instance, the following:
1) Experience of coexistence with a nuclear facility in the region.
2) Experience with a major industrial facility in the region.
3) Existence of a local association – committee, group involved in the project or other
groups…
In order to ensure transparency and participation of all the stakeholders, represented by the
Working Group on Dialogue, the socio-economic acceptability indicators of the sites for the
various DGR site identification stages will be formulated jointly on the premises of the
Working Group on Dialogue on the Deep Geological Repository. The indicators emerging
from the broad discussion will be incorporated into the revisions of this Methodological
Guideline.
The Working Group on Dialogue should discuss the conclusions from the assessment of
each site based on the criteria within each step of the process of setting up the short list and
selection of the candidate sites. The conclusions made by the WG on Dialogue should be
critically evaluated and mirrored in the final conclusion of each stage of the site selection
process.
50
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
9 Concluding provisions
The following will be necessary in order to document the suitability of a site for the
construction of a deep geological repository:
1) Demonstrate and document that all SÚJB requirements laid down in Act No. 18/1997
and its implementing regulations are met.
2) Demonstrate that the DGR construction and operation at the site will have acceptable
environmental impacts as per Act No. 100/2002 and its implementing regulations.
3) Demonstrate that the mining activities will comply with applicable laws and
regulations issued by the State Mining Administration.
4) Demonstrate that any conflicts of interests have been settled and that the
requirements of Act No. 183/2006 needed to obtain the zone planning permission are
met.
Such evidence will not be available during the first site selection stages because a detailed
geological characterisation by using deep boreholes cannot be performed as early as the site
short list preparation stage. Therefore this document uses suitability indicators needed when
preparing the feasibility studies, safety assessment and assessment of the impact on the
environment and on the living conditions in the towns and villages affected by the DGR. As
described in Section 4, the data from the depth of the rock environment will be replaced in
the first stage by data from similar sites, from laboratory experiments and in-situ experiments
in underground laboratories. Details of how the data are acquired are outlined in the SÚRAO
document “Medium term plan for research and development of activities needed for DGR
siting” [62].
The assessment of the potential sites for the deep geological repository will be divided (apart
from implementation of the geological surveys) into the following 2 main projects:
1) “Research support to DGR safety assessment”, which was started in 2014 and that
will assess all the safety-related rock environment properties.
2) “Research support to the design solution of the deep geological repository”, which
should be initiated in 2015. This project will include, in addition to the repository
feasibility assessment, also environmental impact assessment and operational safety
assessment.
In support of addressing the socio-economic aspects, a study summarising information
needed for their assessment will be initiated in 2015.
51
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
10 References
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
[18]
[19]
[20]
[21]
[22]
Czech Act No. 18/1997 on peaceful uses of nuclear energy and ionising radiation
(Atomic Act) and on the amendment of some acts
IAEA, Geological disposal facilities, Specific Safety Guide, SSG-14, Publication 1483,
2011, Appendix I “Siting of geological disposal facilities.”
Šimůnek P. (1999): Přehled kritérií pro umístění hlubinného úložiště RAO a VP
[Overview of criteria for siting a deep geological repository for RAW and SNF] (arch.
No. SÚRAO 17/99)
Woller F.,Šimůnek P.: Požadavky na lokalitu v etapě hodnocení lokalit, ZA.S./HÚ,
[Requirements for a DGR site at the site assessment stage] 2002
Šimůnek P. et al., Výběr lokality a staveniště HÚ RAO v ČR [Selection of the site and
construction site for a DGR for RAW in the Czech Republic], 2004, (arch. No. SÚRAO
55-56/03, 2003 and 34/04)
Marek J. et al.: Kritéria pro zúžení lokalit a kategorizace tektonických zón [Criteria for
site narrowing and categorisation of tectonic zones]. A document within the
“Geobariéra! project, 2005
IAEA, Siting of Geological Disposal Facilities, A Safety Guide, Safety Series No. 111G-41, IAEA, Vienna, 1994
Woller F.: Výběr lokalit pro HÚ a kritéria jejich hodnocení v etapě charakterizace
lokalit [Selection of sites for a DGR and criteria for their assessment at the site
description stage], 2011 (arch. No. SÚRAO 27/11)
Czech Act No. 114/1992 on nature and landscape protection
Czech Act No. 100/2001 on environmental impact assessment and on the
amendment of some related acts
Czech Act No. 183/2006 on town and country planning and building code (Building
Act)
Czech Act No. 44/1988 on the protection and utilization of mineral resources (Mining
Act)
Czech Act No. 254/2001 on waters and on the amendment of certain other acts
Czech Act No. 106/1999 on free access to information
Czech Act No. 123/1998 on the right to environmental information
Czech Act No. 164/2001 on natural healing resources, resources of natural mineral
waters, natural healing spas and spa resorts and on the amendment of certain related
acts (Spa Act)
IAEA document, Safety fundamentals SF-1, 2006
Methodological guideline SÚRAO MP.22, Požadavky na lokalitu hlubinného úložiště
[Requirements for a deep geological repository site], 2011
SÚJB Regulation No. 132/2008 on the Quality Assurance System in carrying out
activities connected with utilization of nuclear energy and radiation activities and on
Quality Assurance of selected facilities with regard to their categorisation into safety
classes
SÚJB Regulation No. 307/2002 on radiation protection
SÚJB Regulation No. 215/1997 on criteria for the siting of nuclear facilities and very
significant ionising radiation sources
SÚJB Regulation No. 317/2002 on type approval of packaging for the transport,
storage and disposal of nuclear materials and radioactive substances, on type
approval of ionising radiation sources and on the transport of nuclear materials and
specific radioactive substances (on type approval and transport)
52
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
[23]
[24]
[25]
[26]
[27]
[28]
[29]
[30]
[31]
[32]
[33]
[34]
[35]
[36]
[37]
[38]
[39]
[40]
[41]
[42]
[43]
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
Council Directive (EC) 2011/70/EUROATOM of 19 July 2011 establishing
a community framework for the responsible and safe management of spent fuel and
radioactive waste
Act of the Czech National Council No. 61/1988 on mining activities, explosives and on
State Mining Administration
IAEA document, Disposal of Radioactive Waste, Specific Safety Requirements,
No. SSR-5, Pub. 1449, IAEA, Vienna, 2011
IAEA document, The Safety Case and Safety Assessment for the Disposal
of Radioactive Waste, Specific Safety Guide, No-SSG-23, 201
WENRA document, Report on the European pilot study on the regulatory review
of a safety case for geological disposal of radioactive waste, version for consultation,
2010
WENRA document, Radioactive waste disposal facilities safety reference levels
report, draft version 2012;
http://www.wenra.org/media/filer_public/2012/11/19/v0_draft_disposal_report.pdf
NEA/OECD, The nature and purpose of the post-closure safety cases for geological
repositories, 2013, NEA No. 78121
IAEA document, Scientific and Technical Basis for the Geological Disposal
of Radioactive Wastes, TRS - 413, Vienna, 2003
J. Andersson et. al., What requirements does the KBS-3 repository make on the host
rock, Technical Report TR-00-12
Ernst T., Fritschi M., Vomvoris S., Stepwise site selection in Switzerland – Sectoral
plan status and outlook, Proceedings of the 13th Int. Conf. on Env. Rem. And
Radioactive waste management, 2010, 40150
AkEnd committee (Německo), Site Selection Procedure for Repository Sites,
Recommendations, 2002
NDA-RWMD, A proposed framework for stage 4 of the MRWS Site Selection
Process, Technical Note No. 8150715, 2008
NWMO (Canada), Moving forward together: Process for selecting a site for Canadaś
deep geological repository for used nuclear fuel, 2010
BRC (Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future), Report to the
Secretary of Energy, Washington, D.C, 2012
T. Mc Ewen (ed), Rock Suitability Classification, RSC 2012, POSIVA 2012-24
P. La Pointe, P, Wallman, A, Thomas, S. Follin, A methodology to estimate
earthquake effects on fractures intersecting canister holes, SKB Technical Report 9707, March 1997
Interpretace kritérií pro umisťování jaderných zařízení a návrh jejich průkazů
[Interpretation of criteria for the siting of nuclear facilities and proposal for their
identity cards], Safety Guideline BN-JB-1.14, SÚJB, April 2012
IAEA document, Site Evaluation for Nuclear Installations, Safety Requirements, No.
NS-R-3, IAEA, November 2003
IAEA document, Managing Siting Activities for Nuclear Power Plants, IAEA nuclear
energy series No. NG-T-3.7, IAEA, Vienna 2012
SÚJB, Metodický návod k provedení požadavků ustanovení § 13 odst. 3 písm. d) a g)
Atomového zákona č. 18/1997 ve znění pozdějších předpisů pro Postup zpracování
bezpečnostní zprávy pro povolení umístění úložiště radioaktivních odpadů
[Methodological guideline for implementation of requirements of the provisions of
Article 13(3) letters d) and g) of the Atomic Act No. 18/1997 (as amended) for the
Procedure to prepare a safety report for the permission to site a radioactive waste
repository], 2004
Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of
Radioactive Waste Management. Czech Ministry of Foreign Affairs Notification No.
3/2012.
53
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
[44]
[45]
[46]
[47]
[48]
[49]
[50]
[51]
[52]
[53]
[54]
[55]
[56]
[57]
[58]
[59]
[60]
[61]
[62]
[63]
[64]
[65]
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
Council Directive (EC) 2011/70/EUROATOM of 19 July 2011 establishing
a community framework for the responsible and safe management of spent fuel and
radioactive waste
IAEA DS433 Safety Aspects in Siting for Nuclear Installations
AMIGO foundation document, International Project on Approaches and Methods for
Integration Geological Information in the Safety Case, NEA report
NEA/RWM/IGSC(2002), April 2003
NEA/OECD (2007): Linkage of Geoscientific Arguments and Evidence in Supporting
the Safety Case.
NEA report 2002, The Handling of Timescales in Assessing Post-closure Safety of
Deep Geological Repositories, Workshop proceedings, Paris, France 16-18 April
2002, OECD 2002
NEA report 2009, Considering Timescales in the Post-closure Safety of Geological
Disposal of Radioactive Waste, OECD 2009, NEA No. 6424
IAEA SSG-9 Seismic Hazards in Site Evaluation for Nuclear Installations (2010)
Czudek, T. Pleistocenní permafrost na území Československa [Pleistocene
permafrost within Czechoslovakia], Geograf. Čas, 38, 45-252, Bratislava, 1986
Radiation protection recommendations as applied to the disposal of long-lived solid
radioactive waste, ICRP Publication 81, ICRP Annals of the ICRP, September 1999
Pačes T. et al., Výzkum procesů pole vzdálených interakcí HÚ vyhořelého jaderného
paliva a vysoce aktivních odpadů [Examination of the processes of remote interaction
of a DGR for spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive wastes], 2010 (arch. No.
SÚRAO 32/10)
Krajíček L. et al., Předběžná studie proveditelnosti [Preliminary feasibility study],
Terplan, Geobariéra Association, 2004, sites: Blatno, Lodhéřov, Božejovice, Budišov,
Pačejov, Rohozná (arch. No. SÚRAO 1 to 8/04)
Růžičková, E., Zeman, E. (1992): The Blahutovice – 1 borehole near Hranice
na Moravě: weathering effects in Badenian deposits. Scripta, 22: 128-132.
Vieno, T. and Nordman, H. 1999. Safety assessment of spent fuel disposal
in Hästholmen, Kivetty, Olkiluoto and Romuvaara – TILA-99. Posiva Oy, Helsinki,
POSIVA 99-07, 253 p.
Huotari, T. and Kukkonen, I. 2004. Thermal expansion properties of rocks: Literature
survey and estimation of thermal expansion coefficient for Olkiluoto mica gneiss.
Posiva Oy, Olkiluoto, Working Report 2004-04, 62 p.
IAEA (2003): Scientific and Technical Basis for the Geological Disposal of
Radioactive Wastes. Technical report series No. 413, IAEA, Vienna, 2003.
Planning and Design Considerations for Geological Repository Programmes
of Radioactive Waste. IAEA-TECDOC-1755, year: 2014
Preservation of Records, Knowledge and Memory across Generations (RK&M) –
Monitoring of Geological Disposal Faciilities – Technical and Societal Aspects.
NEA/RWM/R 2014
Monitoring and Surveillance of Radioactive Waste Disposal Facilities, SSG-31, IAEA
2014.
Vokál A., Pospíšková I., Vondrovic L. et al, Střednědobý plán výzkumu a vývoje
pro potřeby umístění deep geological repository 2015 – 2025 [Medium-term plan for
research and development of activities needed for DGR siting, 2015 - 2025] (at the
consultation process stage)
SÚJB document, Interpretace kritérií pro umisťování jaderných zařízení a návrh jejich
průkazů [Interpretation of criteria for the siting of nuclear , facilities and proposal for
their identification cards], Bezpečnostní návod BN-JB-1.14, SÚJB, April 2012
Boulton, G.S., Kautsky, U., Morén, L., Wallroth, T., 2001: Impact of long-term climate
change on a deep geological repository for spent nuclear fuel. SKB Technical Report,
TR-99-05
Holub J. et al., Referenční projekt povrchových i podzemních systémů HÚ
v hostitelském prostředí granitových hornin v dohodnuté skladbě úvodního projektu
54
Requirements, suitability indicators and
criteria for the selection of potential deep
geological repository sites
[66]
[67]
[68]
[69]
[70]
[71]
[72]
Registration symbol:
SÚRAO TZ 2/2015
a hloubce projektové studie [Reference project of above-ground and underground
DGR systems in a host environment of granite rocks in the agreed/on structure of the
introductory project and depth of the project study], 1999, (arch. No. SÚRAO 30/99,
33/99)
Pospíšková I. et al., Aktualizace referenčního projectu HÚ v hypotetické lokalitě
[Update of the reference project of a DGR at a hypothetical site], ÚJV Řež,a. s., 2008
- 2012, (arch. No. SÚRAO 3/09, 22/09, 21/10, 56/10, 9/11, 10/11, 16/11, 29/11, 4/12,
5/12 )
Šimůnek P., Výběr lokality a staveniště HÚ RAO v ČR Czech Republic – Analýza
území ČR [Site selection for a RAW DGR and selection of the construction site in the
Czech Republic. Analysis of the area of the Czech Republic], Energoprůzkum Praha,
s. r. o., 2003, arch. No. SÚRAO 10/03, 11/03, 55/03, 56/03
Association of the companies Aquatest a. s. and Stavební Geologie Geotechnika, a.
s., (GeoBariéra), Provedení geologických prací pro hodnocení a zúžení lokalit pro
umístění hlubinného úložiště [Implemented geological work for the assessment and
reducing the list of potential sites for a deep geological repository], 2003 - 2005, arch.
No. SÚRAO 57/03, 58/03, 1 – 7/04, 49 – 51/05
Werner K. et al.: Ecohydrological Responses of Diversion of Groundwater: Case
Study of a Deep-Rock Repository for Spent Nuclear Fuel in Sweden. RPDGR 2013:
42:517-526.).
Forum on Stakeholder Confidence, NEA/OECD, 2014
Updating the concept of radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel handling, Prague,
November 2014
Statute of the Working Group on Dialogue, http://www.surao.cz/cze/Pracovniskupina/Statut-pracovni-skupiny
55