TL: RADIOACTIVE WASTE DISPOSAL, EASTERN EUROPE SO: Phil Richardson, Greenpeace International (GP) DT: July 1992 Keywords: greenpeace reports nuclear power waste disposal europe east hungary czechoslovakia romania bulgaria poland gp / ---------- Group 8 Eastern Europe updated July 92 ---------------------- Bulgaria updated 5th December Nuclear power in Bulgaria is only now becoming subject to scrutiny by Western safety officials. The main reactor type in use is the Russian-built VVER, already being closed in east Germany and elsewhere as unsafe. A reactor complex at Kozloduy generated more than 34% of the country's total capacity in 1990 (7). There are a total of 5 units in Bulgaria, with 2 more under construction (1). **June 1991** (2) A newspaper report in Germany has suggested that parts from the now-closed VVER plant at Greifswald are to be sold to Bulgaria for use at Kozloduy, in an attempt to bring the reactors up to international safety standards. This was confirmed in November as being true, with equipment woth $12 million involved (6). It has been claimed that the reactor currently under construction at Belene, near Svishtov in central northern Bulgaria is in an area damaged by an earthquake in 1977 (3). **July 1991** (4) An IAEA safety study of the Kozloduy reactors has recommended immediate closure of the plant, due to a large number of design and operational safety faults. Only by spending upwards of several hundred million dollars could standards be satisfactorily improved, according to Ludmil Genov, president of the IAEA committee on energy. (see also Greenpeace International critique of backfitting plans (8). **September 1991** (5) A government report has highlighted problems associated with storage of liquid wastes at Kozloduy. It describes storage basins as poorly insulated, suggesting that millions of litres of radioactive water are leaking out. **November 1991** (6) Bulgaria has signed an agreement with the American Westinghouse company to build a waste processing plant at Kozloduy, costing some $10 million. Work is likely to begin in 1992. Information on other waste disposal operations is not available at present. Sources: 1. IAEA Bulletin 4/1990 2. Suddeutsche Zeitung, 10/4/91, via WISE 354. 3. Ecoglasnost via WISE 354 4. UP 1/07/91 via Greenbase 5. Reuters 27/9/91 via Greenbase 6. Reuters 4/11/91 via Greenbase 7. A Newman 1991; An international view of nuclear power plants - an ES & T Precis. Environmental Science and Technology, Vol 25. No. 10. 8. GPI November 1991: Risk Finance: Backfit vs. Shutdown of VVER Nuclear Reactors. ----------------- Czecho-Slovak Federal Republic (CSFR) updated 24th March 92 There are 4 Soviet designed VVER-440 PWRs in operation at Jaslovske Bohunice near Bratislava in Slovakia and 4 at Dukovany in the Czech Republic. These are identical to the reactors at Greifswald in Germany, which were shut-down in 1991. 4 more PWRs units are under construction at Temelin, near Ceske Budejovice in Western Bohemia and 4 at Mohovce near Levice in southern Slovakia. **February 1991** Western reactor manufacturers are in discussions regarding the construction of further plants. As well as Temelin, a new site at Tetov, 100 kms east of Prague, is also under consideration, as are sites at Blahutuvice, near Ostravia, in Moravia, and at Kecerovce in Slovakia. However, the Ministry of Environment stated, in a report on January 14th, that it was `not in favour of construction of more nuclear reactors on the territory of the Czech Republic' (4). In 1990 nuclear provided 28% of consumed electricity (7). This is planned to increase to 50% by 2000 (1). It was announced in January 1991 that an accord had been signed between the CSFR and France on modernisation of the nuclear industry. The possibilities include reprocessing of spent fuel (3). **************************************************************** Exact information on waste management is only just becoming available, following the change in government in 1989. What is becoming clear that waste management practices have, in many cases, been very poorly controlled. The uranium processing plant, MAPE, at Mydlovary, is a case in point, where independent studies have recently shown that widespread and uncontrolled dumping of contaminated sludges and equipment has lead to extensive contamination of a wide area. A cleanup plan has not yet been formulated, and there has been intense pressure, led in particular by Greenpeace Austria, for the immediate closure of the plant. Following this campaign, it has now been announced that MAPE will cease uranium processing in the end of 1992 and shift its production to the production of machine parts etc.(1). L/ILW **September 90** There is currently thought to be an active disposal site in a disused limestone mine at Litomerice, where new safety analyses are currently underway. The conclusions of the first phase were that more hydrological studies were needed. These will cost 1-3 million Crowns. The outcome of these investigations will decide whether the site will continue in operation (2). A site also exists at Litomerice for low and medium level wastes from industrial and hospital sources, in a former Nazi arms factory (1). Two repositories have been developed elsewhere, but both are having problems in obtaining site operating licences. 1. Dukovany in Bohemia; This is possibly also in a disused limestone mine, but investigations have shown the presence of springs below the disposal horizon. 2. Mochovce in Slovakia; Here, examination of the repository structure has discovered very poor cement quality, with holes and cracks. More work is in progress to quantify the problem (2). A significant point to note is that the 2 repositories are on the same sites as operational or planned reactors, and are effectively dedicated facilities. **June 1991** (6) It was reported in the latest IAEA Bulletin (6), that the Atomic Energy Commission has requested the IAEA to perform an international peer review of the planned on-site disposal of LLW at Mochovce. It is to focus on the safety assessments which have already been carried out for the facility. It is expected to be carried out mid-1991. HLW 40 tonnes of spent fuel are currently stored in 150 steel containers at Bohunice, from the reactor on the same site, which was shut down following near meltdowns in 1976 and 1977. The containers, stored under water, are known to be corroding and irradiating the cooling pond water. High levels of contamination have also been found in the nearby Dudvah River (3). Prior to 1988, spent fuel was transported to the USSR for reprocessing. This arrangement was then cancelled by the Soviet authorities. Negotiations regarding possible spent fuel reprocessing have also been carried out with the United Kingdom and Germany in the past (5). Investigations have begun into the possible suitability of a granite in Southern Bohemia for direct disposal (2). The exact location is as yet unknown. **March 1992** Czech Power Enterprises (CEZ) has commissioned 2 German firms to undertake the licence and planning documentation for a proposed intermediate storage facility for spent fuel at Dukovany. The 2 firms are Nukem GmbH and the GNS Consortium (Gesellschaft Fur Nuklear Service mbH). If plans are approved by the CSFR government, the main contract is planned to be signed in July this year. The facility would consist of a storage building and 60 containers, able to accommodate 5,000 fuel elements. It is currently planned to begin operations in March 1994 (8). Sources: 1. Greenpeace Austria 2. From discussions with a worker at the Czech Institute of Radiological Protection, Luxembourg CEC Conference 1990. 3. Article by Sebastian Klinke in SCRAM 81, Feb/March 1991 4. Nucleonics Week 07/02/91 5. WISE 354 14/6/91 6. IAEA Bulletin Vol 33 No 1 7. A Newman 1991; An international view of nuclear power plants - an ES & T Precis. Environmental Science and Technology, Vol 25. No. 10. 8. NuclearFuel 16/03/92 ----------------- Estonia July 92 ------- There are two 25 Mw land-based submarine reactors at Paldiski, on the Baltic coast. These are currently being operated by Russians against the wishes of the Estonian government, which favours there immediate shutdown and decommissioning (1). There is also concern about the waste dump at Sillimae, also on the Baltic, which includes 1,200 tonnes of uranium and 500 tonnes of thorium, resulting from the uranium enrichment operations which took place at Sillimae between 1948-1989 (2). SSI from Sweden has earmarked 100,000 Kronor for the first stage of the cleanup programme, which is expected to cost several million Kronor in total. The waste is leaking into the Baltic. Sources: 1. Nucleonics Week, 28/05/92 2. Greenpeace Finland, March 1992 ------- Hungary ------- A report appeared in 1990 that former officials of a Canadian corporation, Eldorado Nuclear Ltd are advising the Ministry of Industry to close down the Mecsek Ore mine over the next 4-5 years and consider developing a waste disposal site beneath it. The report claims that the Canadians have suggested sinking a shaft below the existing mine to dispose of both nuclear and toxic industrial waste (1). **May 1991** The SM Stoller Corporation from the US has proposed building an underground repository for low and intermediate level wastes near the Paks reactor site. Sources: 1. NuclearFuel 02/04/90 2. WISE 353 24/05/91 ------------ Romania 24th March 92 Five CANDU reactors are currently under construction at the Cernavoda site. With Unit 1 well advanced, AECL are to increase collaboration with the Romanian authorities to speed up the completion of all remaining units (1). AECL is also reported as assisting in the completion of a heay water plant and a fuel fabrication facility. Sources: 1. Nucleonics Week 12/03/92 --------------- Yugoslavia There is only one power generating reactor in Yugoslavia, situated at NE Krsko, together with 3 research reactors. A planned 7 further PWRs were put on hold following Chernobyl. Krsko has been shut down since the start of the Civil War. ***************************************************************** Policy (1) The waste generated to date at Krsko has been stored on site. The facilities are now approaching their capacity, and it is proposed to develop an L/ILW repository. L/ILW Due to the lack of a confirmed site, and therefore any site- specific data, two proposal concepts have been put forward for assessment. These are the shallow land concept and the tunnel concept. The Krsko site was used as a reference site for the safety assessment. It is likely that it will be chosen for further investigation. The site appears to be situated on a granite pluton. Sources: 1. Jelavic V et al; Paris Symposium on Safety Assessment of Radioactive Waste Repositories 1989