questions and thoughts regarding the proposed DGR

The following are questions and some thoughts I have regarding the proposed DGR?

Once emplaced is this waste retrievable? The examples of Asse II and WIPP indicate significant problems with the burial of underground radioactive waste. The Onkalo DGR has a ramp to retrieve waste if something does go wrong however the Revel DGR is using a shaft which can be lost by shifting ground, mechanical failure, human sabotage or terrorism capture.

How will mining out caverns in a deep nuclear repository affect the stability of the surrounding rock (pluton or batholyth)? Initially the rock would move into the mined out areas then with the heat from the emplaced radioactive used fuel containers, it would move out for approximately 50,000 years (AECL). This in-out movement would introduce fracturing and escape routes for radiation that didn't exist before mining. Pressures introduced would produce rock bursts which would affect the barriers (bentonite clay, copper spraying) that are supposed to contain the radioactivity. Fallen rock or loose is common in all mines.

What are the biological contaminants (rockbolting, radioactive ferroxidans) introduced by conventional mining techniques? Conventional mine waste in the presence of sulphides produces ferroxidans or iron bacteria which will develop radiation resistance over time. The introduction of rockbolts and metal timbering for the stability of the caverns also introduces iron which will increase the growth of ferroxidans and irradiated gas and radioactive acid mine drainage contamination.

How will exploration techniques such as diamond drilling be used to predict escape routes for radiation and when identified how will these same escape routes be grouted or sealed and how long will the sealants be expected to last? To determine by diamond drilling where the rock fractures are the drilling will have to occur underground. Surface drilling did indicate joints in the core which was sent to Golders (Mining consultant) for dry and wet analysis however to determine the extent of this fracturing, likely drifts in caverns the cracks, fissures, etc. would have to be followed. Are they to be grouted or sealed likely using a fast hardening cement and if so how long will this sealing last and will the sealant become irradiated and further complicate the radioactive problem?

What is the sequence of mining and the emplacement of high level nuclear waste? Are the caverns (several kilometres of tunnels and caverns) to be mined out first or will emplacement occur with mining? While robotic mining is advancing in uranium mines in northern Saskatchewan human miners will be required and what are the safety measures to protect these workers? The radioactive waste has not been fully retrieved from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant. While significant progress has been made in managing the site, the vast majority of the melted nuclear fuel remains inside the damaged reactor buildings, with full decommissioning and cleanup expected to take 30 to 40 years from the 2011 disaster. Irradiated, corroded and malfunctioning equipment in the DGR will have to be changed out (pumps, monitors, robotic equipment, etc.) Handling nuclear waste and equipment underground by robotics has a long ways to go.

How many of the 5.9 million used nuclear fuel bundles are damaged when they go underground at at what stages of the nuclear waste chain does this action occur? What radiation do damaged used fuel bundles emit and what is the danger to humans and the environment? How does robotic handling of used fuel bundles and transportation packages contribute to this increase in radiation? How big a factor is increased transportation and handling in increased radioactive release and GHG emissions? What new wastes will go underground from SMR's (salt, liquid, etc.) and how will it be dealt with.

Is their other surface or near surface and underground storage that would affect the main underground storage and chambers? Where will the waste be stored while mining occurs and if this storage is in another near surface underground area how will it affect rock stability underneath and the introduction of other problems such as water or radiation? If the liquid wastes are to be hardened onsite before emplacement underground what are the problems not only with the hardening (cement, asphalt, vitrification) but will their be leakages from the plant to underground workings? How long will these hardening last? Cement breaks down from 55 to 75 years and old workings near Cobalt from 1903 are now crumbling. Romans seem to have had better concrete, (sea shells) Little detail on other surface facilities and handling both of the containers to be used, handling of these containers at both the loading from the reactor sites to the unloading and storage before repacking in used fuel packaging plant (hot cells). Transportation is part of this handling and packaging chain from the reactors to the DGR site and needs inclusion.

Have conventional mining techniques for this DGR been compared to other forms of underground or surface storage (boring, salt, clay, engineered vaults, near surface disposal, shallow rock caverns, deep borehole disposal, etc.)? The Onkalo DGR is using bored chambers as opposed to blasted underground caverns. Their used fuel storage containers are sheathed in 50 mm of copper whereas the NWMO is proposing a 5 mm spray and telling us this is better? The local pulp mills quit using copper sprays years ago because they didn't stand up. The environmental court in Sweden has been waiting years for the proponent, Posiva Oy, to prove to them their 50mm of copper will not corrode in the time scales required. Finland is waiting to see the results from the Swedish court before allowing Onkalo to begin operating. There is lots of clay and Canadian Shield rock around old uranium mines near Bancroft, Ontario and maybe these would be suitable storage areas. We also have salt mines near Goderich and Windsor. Salt is supposed to be self healing and has a rock salt location been considered? Both these rock salt and clay locations are close to the reactors in Southern Ontario.

What is the relationship between surface and underground activity? While drainage ponds, waste piles and a used fuel packaging plant are indicated will there also be a hardening plant for liquid used fuels? How is the underground to be safely vented and drained? How are drainage and venting equipment (pumps, trolleys, conveyor, filters, etc.) to be changed out and how will radiation affect these changeouts? Are there any plans to put an SMR on the site? When the surface equipment becomes to irradiated to operate where will that waste go?

There needs to a business plan showing sequencing and costing of DGR activity. Democratically, this should be vetted by the auditor general and public debate is needed to decided if a DGR is not only affordable to taxpayers but the safest, long term approach to storing waste. Any costing would have to include transportation and estimates of nuclear liability if something was to go wrong. The military maxim demonstrated by the book, Command and Control by Eric Schlosser, Penguin Books, 1913 looking at nuclear weapons, the Damascus Incident and the illusion of safety shows if it can go wrong, it will go wrong.