EFDA EUROPEAN FUSION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT V. MASSAUT 1 Monitoring Meeting TW5-TSW-001, -001B and -002 Mol 27/06/2006 Participants: ENEA, NNC, STUDSVIK, SCKCEN, UKAEA EFDA-CSU Garching

EFDA EUROPEAN FUSION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT V. MASSAUT 2 Aims of the meeting For task -001B (art.5.1.b): q to present the results For task -001 (art.5.1.a): q To review the work already done (D1- D3; part of D8) q To coordinate the different subtasks and deliverables q To define how the results will be reached for each subtask q To try to detect potential difficulties q Planning, schedule, reference documents, actions For task -002 (art.5.1.a): q D1: (changes in IAEA clearance ref. doc) : present status q D2: (3D Alara planning tool): definition of the tools, needs and applications; how to apply it for a fusion example: present situation

EFDA EUROPEAN FUSION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT V. MASSAUT 3 The waste and recycling aspect is of very high strategic importance the claim on low radioactive waste production from fusion must be substantiated and based on solid analysis the recycling process is the main part of the waste minimization process recycling materials always produces secondary waste; it should be interesting to know which proportion these waste represent the sorting and classification of materials cannot be based on the radiation level alone

EFDA EUROPEAN FUSION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT V. MASSAUT 4 Task TSW-001: Recycling Fuel cycle Secondary Waste Contaminated materials Decontaminate Detritiate Secondary Waste Recycle Free release Activated materials Waste Disposal Storage Recycle Secondary Waste Detritiate maybe need to detritiate here

EFDA EUROPEAN FUSION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT V. MASSAUT 5 Feasibility of recycling what are the issues ? It is not obvious that all the materials and parts can be recycled The radioactivity is not the only parameter leading to recycle or not Recycling “noble” or valuable materials involves also other challenges (separation, metallurgy, refining, machining, joining, leak-tightness, changes in properties,…) What is the experience in remote handling for all these steps (dismantling – separation – raw material processing – machining and fabrication) Are there needs for further R&D (like e.g. mechanical testing of reused material)

EFDA EUROPEAN FUSION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT V. MASSAUT 6 How are the steps linked together ? Store for decay Recycle How long? waste Sort & separate how to manufacture? radioactive buildup? mech & phys properties changes? secondary waste How? selective decay? capacity Refine, Manufacture, Assemble, Test, Qualify Detritiation to be foreseen somewhere

EFDA EUROPEAN FUSION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT V. MASSAUT 7 Therefore it was proposed to work in steps Define components and materials involved; Determine volumes & masses+ properties + main boundary conditions Define activity limits for the dismantling, (melting), fabrication or reuse (&waste ) Define duration before recycling, activation of materials and decay time (depending on parts & components concerned) Estimate storage capacity needed or limits. Compare with existing storage facilities. Summarize the whole process and cycle Category of wastes (based on international standards) and on results of the cycle analysis Define the categories of materials based on the different routes in the cycle Define the needed R&D Finalised In parallel, study on the so-called “Complex Recycling” industrial experience

EFDA EUROPEAN FUSION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT V. MASSAUT 8 We should also prepare our common SOFT paper on recycling ChapterProposed author pages 1. IntroductionVM fig. 2. Definition of concerned components and materialsLDP Return of experience of current fission material recyclingRB, RP, LO fig. 4. Activity categories and limits for dismantling, fabrication and reuse LO Activation of material and decay timeRP Storage capacity needsLLS, KB fig. 7. Summary on categories and material routesLLS, all fig. 8. Remaining issues (and needed R&D)LO, LLS, all Conclusion and referencesVM, all0.25 TOTAL 6.0 Proposal of work breakdown