April 2022
The radioactive wastes at Chalk River Laboratories (CRL), Canada’s main nuclear research facility, are well described in Annex III, Origin and Types of Radioactive Waste, in the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) General Safety Guide GSG-1, Classification of Radioactive Waste:
Annex III, Origin and Types of Radioactive Waste, IAEA General Safety Guide GSG-1, Classification of Radioactive Waste:Waste from research reactors III–16.
The waste generated by research reactors and from some disused radioactive sources is particularly significant because, owing to its level of activity concentration and to the half-lives of the radionuclides, it does not meet the waste acceptance criteria of near surface disposal facilities.Waste from research facilities III–17.
Research facilities (e.g. hot cell chains, glovebox chains) or pilot plants for checking fuel fabrication processes (particularly the fabrication of mixed uranium plutonium oxides, known as MOX), for fuel reprocessing (particularly advanced schemes), and for post-irradiation examinations, as well as their
analytical laboratories, generate types of waste that, often, are different from the typical waste generated by industrial plants. Owing to the presence of non-negligible amounts of long lived alpha emitters, waste from research facilities generally belongs to the ILW class and even, in some circumstances, to the HLW class.
The radioactive waste at CRL would not be appropriate for near surface disposal, even true “near surface disposal” which is defined by the IAEA as trenches and vaults below the ground surface. Much of the waste is likely to belong to the ILW class, requiring disposal tens of meters or more below the ground surface, as noted by Dr. JR Walker, former director of safety engineering and licensing at AECL. See also: National Observer: Waste headed for Ontario site is a radioactive ‘mishmash’: nuclear industry veterans
The NSDF proponent is misusing the name “Near Surface Disposal Facility” for an aboveground landfill. It defies belief that CNSC staff would support the construction of an aboveground facility for wastes from a Government of Canada research facility, nearly all of which (by volume) will remain hazardous and radioactive for more than 100,000 years.
See also: What would go into the Chalk River Mound (NSDF)?
Concerned Citizens of Renfrew County and Area 
[…] During the public comment period on the Environmental Impact Statement for the NSDF in 2017, many groups and individuals expressed concern about intermediate level waste being placed in an above ground mound. Much of the legacy waste at the Chalk River Labs site was created during plutonium production for nuclear weapons and other activities involving “post-fission” radioactive wastes ie. wastes produced in a nuclear reactor that include very long-lived and dangerous materials that are very difficult to manage. Some of these wastes can actually become more radioactive over time due to complex decay chains of long-lived alpha emitters. The International Atomic Energy Agency suggests that radioactive wastes from research facilities such as Chalk River are likely to be intermediate and in some cases even high level waste (details here). […]
LikeLike
[…] International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) says wastes like those produced by Chalk River Laboratories, where the federal government operated […]
LikeLike
[…] to the International Atomic Energy Agency, waste from research facilities such as Chalk River Laboratories generally belongs to the […]
LikeLike
[…] Selon l’Agence internationale de l’énergie atomique, les déchets produits dans les installations de recherche comme les Laboratoires de Chalk River ont généralement une radioactivité de niveau “intermédiaire” et doivent être stockés sous terre, à des dizaines de mètres ou plus sous la surface. […]
LikeLike
[…] International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) referred to by Echlin says waste from research facilities such as Chalk River Laboratories generally belongs to the […]
LikeLike
[…] The proposed facility is not appropriate for the types of waste that would go into it. The waste is heavily contaminated with post fission nuclear reactor waste and includes many radioactive materials such as plutonium that will remain hazardous and radioactive for thousands of years. Nuclear industry veterans who were in charge of managing the waste before privatization say the facility does not meet international safety standards and that the waste should be stored underground. An International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safety standard says “waste produced by research facilities generally belongs to the ILW [intermediate-level waste] class and even, in some circumstances, to the HLW [high-level waste] class.” (Details) […]
LikeLike
[…] misunderstood” according to NRCan (Ottawa Citizen) and are likely to require underground disposal according to the International Atomic Energy Agency. The cost to clean up the site has been estimated at $16 billion, more than the combined total cost […]
LikeLike