Hostname: page-component-669899f699-qzcqf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-26T12:00:00.565Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Safety assessment methodology focused on response characteristics of the disposal system and safety assessment for TRU waste in Japan

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2012

T. Ohi ,
H. Ueda ,
H. Hyodo ,
T. Chiba ,
T. Takase  and
H. Takamura
T. Ohi
Affiliation:
Nuclear Waste Management Organization of Japan (NUMO), 1-23, Shiba 4-chome, Minato-ku, Tokyo, 108-0014 Japan
H. Ueda
Affiliation:
Nuclear Waste Management Organization of Japan (NUMO), 1-23, Shiba 4-chome, Minato-ku, Tokyo, 108-0014 Japan
H. Hyodo
Affiliation:
Nuclear Waste Management Organization of Japan (NUMO), 1-23, Shiba 4-chome, Minato-ku, Tokyo, 108-0014 Japan
T. Chiba
Affiliation:
JGC Corporation, 2-3-1 Minatomirai, Nishi-ku, Yokohama-shi, Kanagawa, 220-6001 Japan
T. Takase
Affiliation:
Mitsubishi Materials Corporation, 1-297 Kitabukuro-cho, Omiya-ku, Saitama-shi, Saitama, 330-8508 Japan
H. Takamura
Affiliation:
Kajima Corporation, 6-5-30 Akasaka, Minato-ku, Tokyo, 107-8502 Japan
Get access

Abstract

In order to enhance the safety of geological disposal and the reliability of the safety assessment carried out for each stage of the geological disposal project, an assessment methodology focused on a sensitivity analysis and an evaluation of importance, which incorporates “system understanding” and “information feedback” into the existing assessment approach, has been developed in this study. In this paper, the assessment methodology and the assessment results as applied for the transuranic (TRU) waste disposal system in Japan will be described. In the sensitivity analysis, an approximate analytical solution was used in order to understand the response characteristics of the engineered barrier system (EBS). In the importance evaluation, important factors relating to the robustness of system safety were identified based on the response characteristics. Furthermore, important features, events, and processes (FEPs) related to such factors and high-impact scenarios were identified based on the information accumulated through “system understanding” and “information feedback”. Based on this approach, the robustness of the TRU waste disposal system was assessed and measures for improving the robustness were identified.

Type
Articles
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 1475: Symposium NW – Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management XXXV , 2012 , imrc11-1475-nw35-o53
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

1. OECD/NEA, Review of Safety Assessment Methods, Disposal of Radioactive Waste, A Report of the Performance Assessment Advisory Group of the Radioactive Waste Management Committee, OECD/Nuclear Energy Agency, Paris, France (1991).Google Scholar
2. JNC, JNC TN1410 2000-001 (2000).Google Scholar
3. FEPC & JNC, JAEA-Review 2007-010, FEPC TRU-TR2-2007-01 (2007).Google Scholar
4. Ohi, T., Takase, H., Inagaki, M., Oyamada, K., Sone, T., Mihara, M., Ebashi, T. and Nakajima, K., Application of a Comprehensive Sensitivity Analysis Method on the Safety Assessment of TRU Waste Disposal in JAPAN, (Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. Vol. 985, Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management XXX, 2006), pp. 129–134.Google Scholar
5. NUMO, NUMO -TR-10–03,(2011). (in Japanese)Google Scholar
6. OECD/NEA, Systematic Approach to Scenario Development, A Report of the NEA Working Group on the Identification and Selection of Scenarios for Performance Assessment of the Radioactive Waste Disposal, (1992).Google Scholar
7. SKI, SKI Report 95:26, (1995).Google Scholar
8. Wickham, S., Harvey, L., Dierckx, A., Gens, R. and Van Geet, M., Evolution of the EBS in the ONDRAF/NIRAS Disposal Concept for HLW and Spent Fuel, IHLRWM 2008, Las Vegas, NV, September 7-11, 2008.Google Scholar
9. Ebashi, T., Ishiguro, K., Wakasugi, K., Kawamura, H., Gaus, I., Vomvoris, S., Martin, A. J. and Smith, P., Trends in Scenario Development Methodologies and Integration in NUMO’s Approach, Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Environmental Remediation and Radioactive Waste Management (ICEM2010), ICEM2010–40124 (2010).10.1115/ICEM2010-40124Google Scholar
10. NUMO, NUMO-TR-10-06, (2011). (in Japanese)Google Scholar
11. Ohi, T., Chiba, T., Nakagawa, T., Takase, T., Nakazawa, T., Akagi, Y. and Idemitsu, K., Derivation of an approximate analytical solution for understanding the response characteristics of the EBS (MRS 2011). [submitted] Google Scholar