CYIL vol. 10 (2019)

JAKUB HANDRLICA

CYIL 10 ȍ2019Ȏ

1. Introduction * 1 The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) estimates 2 that, since the start of nuclear power based electricity production in 1954 to the end of 2013, a total of about 370,000 t HM 3 of spent nuclear fuel has been discharged from all nuclear power plants worldwide. Spent nuclear fuel is considered to be waste in some States as well as a potential future energy resource in others. Should it be considered waste, it will be disposed of as such after some decades of interim storage (“open fuel cycle”). Otherwise, it might one day be reprocessed to recover fissile materials for future use (“closed fuel cycle”). This is recently considered a very technologically and financially demanding option. 4 For the “open fuel cycle”, there is presently broad consensus among technical experts that the preferred method of ensuring long term safety for spent nuclear fuel is disposal in an underground repository (deep geological disposal facility). 5 At depths of several hundred meters, in a tectonically stable region, processes that may disrupt the repository are so slow that the deep rock and groundwater systems remain practically unchanged over hundreds of thousands or even millions of years. 6 However, it is a fact that there are not currently any operating underground repositories, although research into this has been undertaken for several decades. 7 Recently, Finland and Sweden are close to the construction and implementation of their own underground repository. In Finland, the license to construct the underground repository was granted in 2015. It is foreseen that the operation of the repository will be commissioned in the course of the 2020s. The Finnish Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority currently estimates 8 that the operational phase of the planned underground repository will last until approximately 2110, followed by a decommissioning phase lasting about six years. 9 After * This is a written and expanded version of my presentation, held at the 2 nd round table on “Actual problems and developments of nuclear law” at the Moscow State Law Academy (M.G.J.A.) in February 2019. Sincere thanks go to Professor Viktoria V. Romanova for invitation and her kind hospitability. 1 This article has been supported by the Czech Science Foundation through its 17-16764S project „Radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel management – identifying challenges for the Czech legal framework.” 2 IAEA (ed), Status and Trends in Spent Fuel and Radioactive Waste Management (IAEA 2018), 1. 3 Tonnes of heavy metal, abbreviated as “t HM”, is a unit of mass used to quantify uranium, plutonium, thorium and mixtures of these elements. 4 For a brief overview of legal issues, arising from the “closed fuel cycle”, see HANDRLICA, J. ‘Reprocessing of nuclear fuel: Certain legal issues arising from this unique technology’ (2019) 9 The Lawyer Quarterly 150-161. 5 For detail, see McKINLEY, I. G., RUSSELL ALEXANDER, W. and BLASER, P. ‘Development of geological disposal concepts’ in RUSSELL ALEXANDER, W. and McKINLEY, L. E. (eds.), Deep Geological Disposal of Radioactive Waste (Elsevier 2007) 41-76. Here, the authors pay attention also to several other options of the final disposal, which are recently considered as not viable due to either political, or technological reasons: to the sea dumping and sub-seabed disposal (pp. 58-59), Antarctic ice sheet and permafrost disposal (pp. 59-60), partitioning and transmutation (pp. 60-61), space disposal (pp. 61-62) and finally to the long-term surface storage (pp. 62-64). 6 Ibid. 7 At the same time, many States now operate near surface repositories to dispose the low and very low-level radioactive waste. Some States (Finland, Germany and Switzerland) are currently considering the option of disposing this waste in repositories at depths between 50m and 1000m. For a very detailed overview of existing repositories in respective States see www.oecd-nea.org/rwm/profiles . 8 Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority, Management of Spent Fuel and Radioactive Waste in Finland: National Programme in Accordance with Article 12 of the Council Directive 2011/70/Euratom (STUK 2015) 12. 9 Ibid , 15.

286