ANSN Project on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management

ANSN Project on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management

National Workshop on the Application of IAEA Methodology and Tools

for the Safety Case and Safety Assessment for the Management of

Predisposal Radioactive Waste Facilities – Part II

9– 13September 2013, Densapar, Indonesia

Hosted by BAPETEN (Nuclear Energy Regulatory Agency)

Meeting Minutes

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of the workshop was to assist the Indonesian operator and regulator in their work to strengthen capacities in the country for the demonstration of safety of predisposal facilities for management of radioactive waste, focusing on the work performed by the national counterparts since the October 2012national workshop. The workshop was also expanded to include optimization of radiation protection in the control of occupational exposure.

Eighteenparticipants attended the workshop, representing the Indonesian Nuclear Energy Regulatory Agency (BAPETEN) and the Indonesian Nuclear Energy Agency (BATAN). Ms Monika Kinker (IAEA, Waste and Environmental Safety Section) was the technical officer of the workshop and was accompanied by international experts Mr Rodolfo Avila (Sweden), Mr Frederic Ledroit (France), and Mr Christian Lefaure (France).

WORK DONE

The focus of the workshop was to review work done by the Working Groups on Application Case and Regulatory Framework since October 2012 in applying the guidance of GSG-3, General Safety Guide for the Safety Case and Safety Assessmentfor the Predisposal Management of Radioactive Waste. In response to a request by the national counterpart, the workshop was expanded to include technical guidance in adaptingIAEA Safety Reports Series No. 21 (SRS 21), Optimization of Radiation Protection in the Control of Occupational Exposure.

The workshop includedpresentations on IAEA activities related to the SC/SA of predisposal RWM; optimization of occupational exposure and radiation protection; definition, role and documentation of the SC; management of uncertainties (occupational exposure and safety assessment); topical issues related to use of SAFRAN Tool by the application working group; and case studies related to management of Category 3 radioactive sources. The working groups presented the work done since the 2012 workshop toupdate the SC/SA of the National Radioactive Waste Management Facility in Serpong, and on topical issues faced by the regulatory review working group.

Working group sessions were performedduring the week to support further development of the SAfor the application case;issues that need to be considered under the regulatory framework such as requirements on the SCfor predisposal RWM;implementation ofSRS 21 and use of the RADIOR software learning program for optimisation of radiological protection; and to develop and discuss recommendations forwork to be done by the working groups over the next 12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

The conclusions and work plan developed by the working groups are presented in Annexes 1 and 2.As a result of discussions during the workshop, work plans were recommended and agreed by application working group forcontinuing their work in developing (and interacting with the regulatory review working group)the application case performed by BATAN, including also a case study on a reflector that had been removed from the BANDUNG research reactor and will be transported to theRadioactive Waste Treatment Center in Serpong. The participants suggested that another national workshop be organized in September 2014 in Bandung to support the continued development of the safety case, including implementation of dose optimization, for radioactive waste management facilities and activities in the country.

The IAEA, expert lecturers, and course participants wish to acknowledge their appreciation to the host institute of BAPETEN, who provided excellent coordination of meeting facilities and activities, and generally served as an excellent host. The participants felt that the lectures and conduct of the workshop met the objectives and that the lecturers provided excellent coverage of their assigned lecture duties and interacted with participants in the conduct of the exercises and with the sharing of their experiences in their technical areas of expertise. The participants were actively engaged in discussions and exercises.

ANNEX 1. Conclusions and Recommendations of the Regulatory Framework and Application Case Working Groups

During the week the focus of discussions were on developing a better understanding of the safety case concept and development (safety case contents, how should it look), management of uncertainties, and practical application of the graded approach. As a result of discussions during the week, the working groups came up with the following conclusions and recommendations.

Regulatory Framework

• The BAPETEN Chairman Regulation N°3-2006 on Licensing for Nuclear Installations other than Reactors will be reviewed by the group for amending relative to the safety case and safety assessment to be compatible with GSG-3.
• The Regulatory Framework group will review the application case performed by BATAN including the case study on storage of the reflector from the BANDUNG research reactor. The results will be reported during the next National workshop.

Application Case

System description

• Examine if it is necessary to modify waste streams in particular the “compactable waste” branch of “contaminated Material” waste stream
• Modify waste component list regarding DSRS (at the moment all the sources are merged in a single waste component)
• Add the missing data regarding description of waste that are considered in the safety assessment taking into account Waste Acceptance Criteria
• Provide description for storage of high level RW (facility, waste component and related waste stream)

Assessment for Normal Operation

• Continue to develop scenarios for normal operation as it was done for low level RWpre-treatment
• Check the quality of the data relative to releases to air (values for background, list of radionuclides)

Assessment for Accidental Situations

• Provide justification for potential initiating events (PIEs)classified as “not relevant”
• For each PIE that is relevant, develop scenarios that should be considered
• For each scenario,define one (or more) impacts and for each of them:
• Consider whether the impact could be classified as “not relevant” or is bounded by another impact
• Consider whether the scenarioshould be assessed qualitatively or quantitatively. If it is assessed quantitatively, an assessment case should be defined
• Perform a calculation for each quantitative assessment case

ANNEX 2. Conclusions and Recommendations of the Optimization Working Group

During the week the focus of discussions were on the optimization concept, process and decision making tools. The working group has developed a much better understanding of optimization concepts (collective dose, detriments, equity; etc.), processes (steps of the procedures, roles of management and regulatory body; etc.) and decision making tools (cost benefit analysis, multi criteria analysis, man-Sievert monetary value). The working group considered the “Frequently asked questions on ALARA” available on the ORPNET website ( a valuable tool.As a result of discussions during the week, the working group came up with the following conclusions and recommendations.

The working group will perform a case study of the transport and handling ofthe Bandung research reactor reflector which has been dismantled and removed and is currently being stored in the facility. The future objective is to transport the reflector to the Radioactive Waste Treatment Center in Serpong; concerns being the transportation process itself as well as exposureof workers and the public to high levels of radiation. Hence for the next national workshop the working group will address the subject for both working groups (SAFRAN and Optimization).

While industrial radiography and interventional procedures used inmedical practice are the main concerns for occupational exposurein Indonesia, the workshop emphasized that similar situations are also encountered in the Member States.Indonesia intends to make use of field implementation of the Information System on Occupational Exposure in Medicine, Industry and Research (ISEMIR) recommendations for better application of optimization.

During the workshop, a technical visit was made to a nearby hospital with a CAT Lab facility used for interventional procedures; although the collective and personal protection appeared to beadequate, there was no information about the behaviour of doctors to verify that they implement good practices.Indonesia intends to perform separate surveys of interventional procedures as well as industrial radiography.Two groups with adequate representation of stakeholders will be established to prepare guidance for reducing occupational exposure; making use as necessary of dose optimization procedures. A progress report will be produced for the next workshop.

While the working group believes that SRS 21 (published in 2002)is a very useful document, it was agreed that it should be updated to take into account the newly revisedIAEA General Safety Requirement Part 3. It was also agreed that the scope of SRS 21should also be expanded toconsider to non-nuclear facilities.In addition, the IAEA should consider upgrading it the RADIOR software tool (or developing another software tool) to support cost benefit analysis and multi criteria analysis. An alternate solution could be to make available other existing (commercial or freeware) software.

Proposed Action Plan

The case study of the dismantled reactor reflector in BATAN Bandung can be addressed during next year’s workshop, proposed to be held in Bandung.

Indonesia (through BAPETEN Chairman) will prepare the formal proposal to the IAEA Nuclear Safety and Security Department regarding the development of an IAEA tool for optimization of occupational radiation protection (4th quarter of 2013).

BAPETEN and BATAN need to consider other venues beyond ANSN RWMTG to address optimization in industrial radiography and interventional radiology. BAPETEN will prepare the proposal to the IAEA for an expert mission.

Page1