Content uploaded by Aly Islam Metwally Aly
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Aly Islam Metwally Aly on Nov 06, 2016
Content may be subject to copyright.
Abstract
•According to the Egyptian Nuclear Law and its executive regulations, the Regulatory Authority
(ENNRA) has the authority to issue a site permit for nuclear power plant as a first stage in the
licensing process. However there is a possibility to issue a combined site and construction
permit. The environmental report should be submitted in support of the site evaluation report
as a part of the documents required to during the site permit stage and to be updated during
the construction and operation stages and further in the decommissioning stage. For issuing a
construction permit, a preliminary safety analysis report should be submitted to the nuclear
regulator.
•In this work a comparative study was made to elucidate the similarities and differences
between the information required in the site evaluation report and those required in the
environmental impact assessment report. Although there are a lot of similarities between the
information required in the two reports the extent and degree of details are different in the two
reports. A major difference is that the site evaluation report concentrates on site
characteristics and the design parameters required in designing the nuclear power plant in the
construction permit stage, whereas the environmental impact assessment report concentrates
on the study of the nuclear power plant on the environment. Both site evaluation and
environmental impact assessment should be conducted along the life time of the nuclear
power plant.
•In Egypt the requirements for the site evaluation of nuclear power plants have been already
issued . The environmental impact assessment report covers both radiological and non-
radiological impacts. A memorandum of understanding will be signed between ENRRA and the
ministry of Environment to define exact responsibilities of each party during the review and
assessment of the environmental report submitted by the applicant.
•According to the IAEA safety fundamentals document SF1, 2006, the
main safety objective is to protect people and environment from
harmful effects of ionizing radiation.
•To achieve this objective there are 10 safety principles which provide
the basis for the safety requirements and guides. These principles are:
•Principle 1: Responsibility for safety.
•Principle 2: Role of government.
•Principle 3: Leadership and management for safety.
•Principle 4: Justification of facilities and activities.
•Principle 5: Optimization of protection.
•Principle 6: Limitation of risks to individuals.
•Principle 7: Protection of present and future generations.
•Principle 8: Prevention of accidents.
•Principle 9: Emergency preparedness and response.
•Principle 10: Protective actions to reduce existing or unregulated
radiation risks.
•Safety measures and security measures must be designed and
implemented in an integrated manner so that security measures do
not compromise safety and safety measures do not compromise
security.
•The primary means of preventing and mitigating the consequences of
accidents is ‘defence in depth’
•Defence in depth is provided by an appropriate combination of:
•An effective management system with a strong management
commitment to safety and a strong safety culture.
•Adequate site selection and the incorporation of good design and
•engineering features providing safety margins, diversity and
redundancy, mainly by the use of:
- Design, technology and materials of high quality and reliability;
- Control, limiting and protection systems and surveillance features;
- An appropriate combination of inherent and engineered safety
features.
•Therefore the siting of a nuclear power plant is a very important and
crucial issue which may affect the safety and security of the plant
during its entire life. An adequate site selection provide the basis of a
good design and can affect the safety and security of the plant in its
entire life cycle. In the same time the environmental impact
assessment of nuclear power plant is also an important and essential
stage which in combination with adequate siting provides the basis of
a safe operation of the nuclear power plant.
•It is important to note the differences between site survey and site
evaluation stages.
Siting and Site Evaluation Process in the Life-Cycle
of Nuclear Installation
MAJOR STEPS IN LICENSING PROCESS
•Each step of the licensing process may be divided into several sub-steps or may be
merged or combined as appropriate to facilitate the regulatory process.
•Combining authorizations or licenses (e.g. for construction and operation) may also give
more predictability to the process for the licensee. At each hold point set down by the
regulatory body or in the licensing process, an authorization or a license from the
regulatory body may be required.
•Conditions may be attached to licenses granted at each step and may require that the
licensee obtain further, more specific, authorizations or approvals before carrying out
particular activities.
•Article 44 of the Egyptian nuclear and Radiation law no. 7,
2010 states that ENRRA is entitled to issue permits and
licenses for constructing , operating and exit from service for
nuclear installations, according to the issuing stages as follows:
•Site selection permit.
•Construction permit.
•Pre-operation tests permit.
•Operating license for the installation.
•Exit from Service license.
•Furthermore the executive regulations of the law issued by
the prime minister decree No. 1326, 2011 states in Article
13 the details of the licensing stages of the nuclear
installations in the following steps:
•Site Approval Permit
•The applicant should indicate the purpose of
constructing the reactor, or production, processing and
enrichment and fabrication of nuclear fuel and spent fuel
storage installations and the application should be
accompanied by the following :
•Information on the reactor or production, processing and
enrichment and fabrication of nuclear fuel and spent fuel
storage installations.
•description of the legal rights of the applicant and the site.
•a report on the site information and characteristics as well as
design basis and design concepts and complete information
about the party who conducted the site studies.
•An environmental impact assessment report endorsed from the
Environmental Affairs Agency (EEAA) according to the laws,
regulations, standards and technical requirements issued in that
respect.
•copies of the approvals of concerned ministries and parties concerned
about the reactor, or production, processing and enrichment and
fabrication of nuclear fuel and spent fuel storage installations to be
constructed, and in particular ministries of defense, interior, civil
aviation, transport, local development, governorate involved, general
security administration, and the supreme council of antiquities.
–Construction permit.
•The application for construction permit should be
accompanied by the following:
•A copy of the site approval permit.
•A time schedule for construction and installation.
•Adequate data on the companies and party responsible for
the supervising the construction, manufacturing and
installation and its organizational structure.
•complete information about the person or parties contracted
for supplying or constructing works including the nationality
and its previous work record in the field.
•Radiation protection program.
•Quality management system for the contracted parties.
•Radioactive waste management systems.
•A preliminary safety analysis report.
•A preliminary plan for physical protection and security
of nuclear installations.
•A preliminary system for applying safeguards and
control of nuclear materials.
•A declaration of commitment to the conditions of
ENRRA to be met.
•A combined site and construction permit can be also
issued for nuclear reactors provided that the applicant
should submit all complete site data accompanying the
psar. In this case the permission is issued within 2
years from the date of application submission fulfilling
all data and documents requested and on the condition
that none of the rejection criteria is applicable to the
site under study.
The Egyptian site evaluation requirements for nuclear installations has been
recently endorsed by ENRRA board in March 2016. The document covers the
following main aspects:
- The effects of external events occurring in the region of the particular site
(these events could be of natural origin or human induced;
- The characteristics of the site and its environment that could influence the
transfer to persons and the environment of radioactive material that has
been released;
- The population density and population distribution and other
characteristics of the external zone in so far as they may effect possibility of
emergency measures and the need to evaluate the risk to individuals and
population.
•EGYPTIAN REJECTION CRITERIA
•The following rejection criteria shall be considered:
a) Areas that show evidences or have potential for fault displacement at
or near the site. Preference should be given to sites located at a
sufficient safety distance from capable faults (at least the site and site
vicinity must show the absence of capable faults).
b)Areas covered with, deep unsuitable soil where soil has a potential for
ground collapse e.g karstic hazard or cavities.
c) Areas containing extensive and important ground/ surface drinking
water (e.g. Nile Valley and Delta).
d) Areas subjected to high flood events and not compensated by
practical engineering solution.
e) Areas where a feasible emergency plan cannot be implemented.
d) Areas that are possibly affected by volcanic hazard (e.g. fall of
pyroclastic deposits) or active mud volcanism.
General criteria
Requirements for hazards associated with external natural and
human induced events
Requirements for determining the potential effects of the nuclear
installation in the region
Requirements derived from considerations of population and
emergency planning
Specific requirements for evaluation of external events
Earthquakes and surface faulting
Meteorological events
Flooding
Geotechnical hazards
External human induced events
Other important considerations
Effects of the nuclear installation in the region
Atmospheric dispersion of radioactive material
Dispersion of radioactive material through surface water
Dispersion of radioactive material through groundwater
Population distribution
Uses of land and water in the region
Ambient radioactivity
Monitoring of hazards
Management system for site evaluation
Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR)
•In Egypt the EIAR is a necessary document to be submitted to ENRRA
in support of the application for the site approval permit. ENRRA
asked the Nuclear Power Plants Authority (NPPA) to use the nureg
099 :
•REGULATORY GUIDE 4.2, REVISION 2
PREPARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTS FOR NUCLEAR POWER
STATIONS
and complying with the Egyptian nuclear Law no. 7 , 2010 and its
executive regulations the Egyptian Environmental Law no. 4, 1994, its
amendments, as well as relevant national laws.
•A memorandum of understanding between ENRRA and the Egyptian
Environmental Affairs Authority (EEAA) for the review of the EIAE is
now formulated.
•The format and content of the EIAR according to Reg. Guide 4.2 Rev.2
are summarized in the following points:
•Chapter 1 Purpose of the Proposed Facility and Associated
Transmission ........................
•1.1 System Demand and Reliability ................................................
•1.1.1 Load Characteristics ...................................................
•1-1 1.1.2 System Capacity ......................................................
•1-2 1.1.3 Reserve M argins ......................................................
•1.1.4 External Supporting Studies. ............................................
•1.2 Other Objectives ...........................................................
•1.3 Consequences of Delay ......................................................
•Chapter 2 The Site and Environmental Interfaces .........................................
•2.1 Geography and Demography ..................................................
•2.1.1 Site Location and Description ....... ....................................
•2.1.2 Population Distribution .................................................
•2.1.3 Uses of Adjacent Lands and Waters ........................................
•2.2 Ecology ..................................................................
•2-3 Meteorology ..............................................................
•2.4 Hydrology ................................................................
•2.5 Geology ..................................................................
•2.6 Regional Historic, Archeological, Architectural, Scenic, Cultural, and
Natural Features ..... 2.7 Noise ...................................................
•Chapter 3 The Station ................................................................
•3.1 External Appearance .......................................................
•3.2 Reactor and Steam-Electric System .............................................
•3.3 Station W ater Use ..........................................................
•3.4 Heat Dissipation System .....................................................
•3.5 Radwaste Systems and Source Term ............................................
•3.5.1 Source Term ..........................................................
•3.5.2 Liquid Radwaste Systems ...............................................
•3.5.3 Gaseous Radwaste Systems ..............................................
•3.5.4 Solid Radwaste System .................................................
•3.5.5 Process and Effluent Monitoring ..........................................
•3.6 Chemical and Biocide Wastes .................................................
•3.7 Sanitary and Other Waste Systems ............................................. i
•3.8 Reporting of Radioactive Material Movement .....................................
•3.9 Transmission Facilities ......................................................
•Chapter 4 Environmental Effects of Site Preparation, Station
Construction, and Transmission Facilities Construction
•4.1 Site Preparation and Station Construction ...............................
•4.2 Transmission Facilities Construction
•4.3 Resources Committed
•4.4 Radioactivity ..............................................................
•4.5 Construction Impact Control Program ...........................................
•Chapter 5 Environmental Effects of Station Operation .....................
•5.1 Effects of Operation of Heat Dissipation System
•5.1.1 Effluent Limitations and Water Quality Standards ......................
5.1.2 Physical Effects ......................................................
•5.1.3 Biological Effects ......................................................
•5.1.4 Effects of Heat Dissipation Facilities ......................................
•5.2 Radiological Impact from Routine Operation
•5.2.1 Exposure Pathways ....................................................
•5.2.2 Radioactivity in Environment ............................................
•5.2.3 Dose Rate Estimates for Biota Other Than Man ...............................
•5.2.4 Dose Rate Estimates for Man .............................................
•5.2.5 Summary of Annual Radiation Doses
•5.3 Effects of Chemical and Biocide Discharges ......................................
•5.4 Effects of Sanitary Waste Discharges ............................................
•5.5 Effects of Operation and Maintenance of the Transmission Systems ..............
•5.6 Other Effects .............................................................
•5.7 Resources Committed .......................................................
•5.8 Decommissioning and Dismantling .............................................
•5.9 The Uranium Fuel Cycle ...............................
•Chapter 6 Effluent and Environmental Measurements and Monitoring
Programs
•6.1 Applicant's Preoperational Environmental Programs
•6.1.1 Surface Waters
•6.1.2 Ground Water
•6.1.3 Air
•6.1.4 Land
•6.1.5 Radiological Monitoring
•6.2 Applicant's Proposed Operational Monitoring Programs
•6.3 Related Environmental Measurement and Monitoring Programs
•6.4 Preoperational Environmental Radiological Monitoring Data ..
•Chapter 7 Environmental Effects of Accidents
•7.1 Station Accidents Involving Radioactivity
•7.2 Transportation Accidents Involving Radioactivity
•7.3 Other Accidents
•Chapter 8 Economic and Social Effects of Station Construction and Operation
•8.1 Benefits
•8.2 Costs
•Chapter 9 Alternative Energy Sources and Sites
•9.1 Alternatives Not Requiring the Creation of New Generating Capacity
•9.2 Alternatives Requiring the Creation of New Generating Capacity
•9.2.1 Selection of Candidate Areas
•9.2.2 Selection of Candidate Site-Plant Alternatives
•9.3 Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Candidate Site-Plant Alternatives
•9.4 Costs of Alternative Power Generation Methods
•Chapter 10 Station Design Alternatives ...............................................
•10.1 Circulating System .......................................................
•10.2 Intake System ...........................................................
•10.3 Discharge System ........................................................
•10.4 Chemical Waste Treatment .................................................
•10.5 Biocide Treatment .......................................................
•10.6 Sanitary Waste System ....................................................
•10.7 Liquid Radwaste Systems .................................................
•10.8 Gaseous Radwaste Systems .................................................
•10.9 Transmission Facilities ....................................................
•10.10 Other Systems ..........................................................
•Chapter 11 Summary Cost-Benefit Analysis
•Chapter 12 Environmental Approvals and Consultation ......................
•Chapter 13 References .............................................................
•According to the IAEA Nuclear Energy Series document No. NG-T-3.11,
Managing Environmental Impact Assessment for Construction and
Operation of New Nuclear Power Programmes, 2014:,
•The EIA is a process to identify and to assess all the environmental and
socioeconomic impacts of the nuclear power plant. Its objective is to
satisfy questions regarding impacts of the project on environment and
human health. It adds critical information to the licensing process and
permit decision making process. In addition to the primary operating
license, it may be used by some stakeholders (e.g. financing institutions) in
their own specific decision making process.
•The EIA report describes the baseline conditions of the environment and
•Surrounding population, identifies the impacts of the project in all its
phases on the environment and population, and analyses whether
the impacts are significant. If the impacts are significant, the EIA
report present mitigation measures to address the impacts and
monitoring plan designed to keep track of the actual impacts and a
monitoring plan designed to keep track of the actual impacts during
project development and operation.
•The EIA report is a compaign document to the safety analysis report
(SAR), which addresses the safety aspects of the site and the
proposed project.
•The EIA report is the leading document for the site permit request,
while the SAR is the document submitted to the regulatory body for
requesting the site license.
•A bid invitation specification will incorporate the environmental
commitments, limitations and conditions resulting from EIA report
approval to support the vendor evaluation. Environmental permits
and license applications such as site, construction and operating
license, will also include relevant information and conclusions from
the EIA process.
•The environmental monitoring programme is compiled in the permit
phase, utilizing recommendations made in the EIA report.
•There are areas of overlap between the EIA and the safety analysis,
particularly with regards to nuclear power plant parameters and site
characterization and analysis.
•The relationship between the SAR and the EIA report should be
noted. The SAR is a detailed demonstration of the safety of nuclear
power plant, reviewed and assessed by the regulatory body and in
accordance with clearly defined procedures. The SAR contains
accurate and sufficiently precise information on the plant and its
operating conditions, including information on, for example, safety
requirements, the design basis, site and plant characteristics,
operational limits and conditions, in such a way that the regulatory
body will be able to evaluate independently the safety of the plant.
•Information in the SAR, which is required in the EIA, includes:
•Geography of the site, including restricted settlement areas;
•Demography such as nearby and regional populations, including
sensitive subpopulations;
•External hazards that could impact the site;
•Meteorology, including discussion of the characteristics describing
dispersion of airborne contamination.
•Also included is a description of surface water and groundwater,
including moelling showing pathways for water contaminant
transport.
•The SAR also contains information on local and regional geological and
geotechnical parameters , and descriptions of seismic potentials and faults.
Most, if not all, of this provides baseline physical information about the
site and its vicinity, and supports the EIA analysis of the impacts of the
nuclear power plants on the surrounding environment.
•If the data required or intended for the SAR are available for stakeholder
review by the time the EIA report is prepared and published, the EIA could
refer to the data contained in the SAR. Otherwise, the EIA report contains
enough of the SAR information relevant to site characterization to support
its analysis and conclusions. Care should be taken throughout the entire
EIA programme to ensure consistency between the EIA report and the SAR.
•Unique issues in nuclear environmental impact assessments
•Nuclear power technology possess unique characteristics that affect
the environment, such as routine and accidental radiological releases,
principally to air and water. Specialized techniques for modelling
these potential releases have been developed, with particular
methodologies for impact assessment.
•Radioactive waste and spent fuel management is also specific for
nuclear EIA, and would need to be addressed. As part of the baseline
environmental data collection programme, radiological
measurements need to be made. Radiological monitoring is also
required throughout operation and decommissioning.
•Although thermal and chemical releases are addressed in conventional power
plants EIAs, the power rating of most nuclear power plants dictates an increased
level of concern for these two types of impact. Depending on the type of cooling
water system, thermal discharge limits set to protect the environment typically
have an impact on the cost efficiency of the plant. If the plant is designed with a
once through cooling system, then the water intake impacts may be also
significant, including entertainment of aquatic organisms.
•The nuclear power plant project may well be more complex than any other
industrial project, the amount of land and time required for construction, the
distance of cooling water intake and discharge channels (for a once through
cooling system), requirements for heavy haul roads or barge transport and
unloading, the international interest, quality assurance requirements and the
time from initial project planning to active power generation all require new
expertise to assess impacts adequately.
•Radioactive waste management, from low level to high level waste as well
as spent fuel management should be presented in the nuclear EIA report. A
specific EIA report should be developed for the disposal facilities and final
disposal of spent fuel.
•Another unique issue for nuclear power plants is decommissioning. This
complex process requires a detailed EIA report, treatment of disposal of
contaminated construction materials, and monitoring of the situation until
release from regulatory control.
•Owing to the international and public attention given to the potential
impacts of a nuclear power plant project (both radiological and non-
radiological), it is expected to spend more resources and time on the EIAs
relating to nuclear power plants project than those associated with other
industries.
References
IAEA Safety Standards Series No.SF-1,Fundamental Safety Principles, Safety Fundamentals (2006)
IAEA Safety Standards Series No. SSG 16, Establishing the Safety Infrastructure for a Nuclear Power
Programme (2013).
IAEA Safety Standards Series No. SSG 12, Licensing Process for Nuclear Installations (2010).
IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GS-G-4.1, Format and Content of the Safety Analysis Report for Nuclear
Power Plants (2004).
IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GSR Part 4 (Rev.1), Safety Assessment for Facilities and Activities
(2016).
IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GS-G-1.3, Regulatory Inspection of Nuclear Facilities and Enforcement
by the Regulatory Body (2002).
IAEA Safety Standards Series No. NS-R-3 (Rev.1), Site Evaluation for Nuclear Installations (2016).
IAEA Safety Standards Series No. SSG-35, Site Survey and Site Selection for Nuclear Installations (2015).
IAEA Safety Standards Series No. NS-G-3.1, External Human Induced Events in Site Evaluation for Nuclear
Power Plants (2002).
IAEA Safety Standards Series No. NS-G-3.2, Dispersion of Radioactive Material in Air and Water and
Consideration of Population Distribution in Site Evaluation for Nuclear Power Plants (2002).
IAEA Safety Standards Series No. SSG-9, Seismic Hazards in Site Evaluation for Nuclear
Installations (2010).
IAEA Safety Standards Series No. SSG-18, Meteorological and Hydrological Hazards in
Site Evaluation for Nuclear Installations (2011).
IAEA Safety Standards Series No. NS-G-3.6, Geotechnical Aspects of Site Evaluation and
Foundations for Nuclear Power Plants (2004).
IAEA Safety Standards Series No. SSG-21, Volcanic Hazards in Site Evaluation for Nuclear
Installations (2012).
Ch. Poinssot , S. Bourg ,*, N. Ouvrier , N. Combernoux , C. Rostaing ,M. Vargas-Gonzalez , J. Bruno
Assessment of the environmental footprint of nuclear energy systems.Comparison between
closed and open fuel cycles, Energy 69 (2014) 199-211.
