These official data, including those concerning liquid wastes, are shown in Table 1. They represent wastes located at facilities overseen by a number of government agencies. Most are the result of the long-term production of nuclear weapons, operation of nuclear power stations, and reprocessing. As can be inferred from the data in Table 1, liquid wastes, both in volume and activity, constitute 85-90% of all wastes at Minatom sites; at Ministry of Defense sites they make up 50-60% of all wastes by volume and 20% by activity. Under the Ministry of Transport and the State Committee on Defense Industries (Goskomoboronprom), liquid wastes are 60-70% of the total volume.

However, there are a few important omissions from the table. Wastes from uranium mining and at the "Radon" facilities (where low- and medium-level wastes are stored) are not broken down between solid and liquid. In addition, there is little information about wastes connected to underground nuclear explosions. Also excluded from the table are liquid wastes that have been injected into three underground facilities (see below). Minatom has also tended to refuse responsibility for the most dangerous portion of its nuclear inheritance from its predecessor Minsredmash (the Ministry of Medium Machine-Building), including wastes stored in tanks and in open reservoirs and pools.²

The diversity of liquid wastes-both in their activity and composition, as well as in their form of storage-merits special attention. Liquid wastes are classified primarily according to their origin, the primary form of their contamination, their radioactivity (low-level, medium-level, and high-level), and by their saturation with salts. Some are stored in metallic and cement tanks, others in surface pools and reservoirs, and a large volume is injected into underground layer-collectors (see Concentrations and Radioactive Content of Liquid Wastes in Russia). Some are even stored on ships and barges.

A number of management techniques have been tried for liquid radioactive wastes. Methods that have been developed include purifying and concentrating with subsequent solidification and then bituminization or cementification. For medium-level wastes (containing transuranic elements) and high-level wastes, technologies of encasing wastes in mineral-like matrices and of mixing radionuclides with molten glass and pouring the mixture into metal canisters are used. These technologies have been developed at nuclear power stations and at the Mayak plant (Chelyabinsk-65), borrowing broadly on international expertise. ³ Technologies from non-nuclear applications are being implemented on wastes (including liquid wastes) at the Moscow and Leningrad "Radon" low-level waste facilities. The volumes involved are relatively large-the Moscow facility receives 2,000 cubic meters (m³) of liquid wastes per year.

Managing liquid waste continues to be a pressing problem at nuclear power plants. The amount of waste produced depends on the type of reactor: graphite-moderated RBMK type reactors produce 100,000 m³ of liquid wastes per year; light-water VVER type reactors, 40,000 to 135,000 m³. In total 1.7 million m³ of liquid wastes are produced annually. The overwhelming portion of these wastes, supposedly harmless, are poured into open reservoirs. Tanks of liquid wastes at nuclear power plants contain ion exchange resins, contaminated filter materials, waste treatment sludges, and decontamination solutions.

As of January 1, 1995, more than 150,000 m³ of liquid radioactive waste was stored at nuclear power plants in Russia (see Table 2). ⁴ It is officially acknowledged that no nuclear power plant in Russia has adequate facilities for the treatment of liquid wastes. Treatment centers are only in the planning stages, and liquid waste storage facilities are filled almost to the brim. Injection of low- and medium-level wastes into underground collection layers is also being considered at some nuclear power plants.

Spent fuel and liquid waste: "Siamese twins"

Minatom's commitment to a closed fuel cycle involves a policy to reprocess irradiated fuel, which results in the production of large volumes of liquid waste. The volume of these stored liquid wastes at radiochemical facilities is currently calculated to be 25,000 m³ of highly-radioactive wastes (in steel tanks) and 400 million m³ medium- and low-level wastes (in tanks, reservoirs and pools). Medium- and high-level liquid wastes are concentrated by evaporation and stored in the form of concentrates, pulp, ion-exchange resins and filter-materials in stainless steel and reinforced concrete tanks. Some of the medium-level pulps are cemented and bituminized. The volumes of low-level liquid wastes are so great that treatment of all of them is simply impossible. "Remediation" of pools and reservoirs containing these wastes is accomplished by filling them in with cement blocks, rocks, soil, crushed rock, or mud.

As of January 1, 1995 the amount of spent fuel in Russia was estimated to be 9,335 tons with an activity of 4.65 billion curies. Subtracting the 6,100 tons of RBMK fuel rods (which are not reprocessed) leaves 3,500 tons, including the 270 tons that have been generated between January 1995 and August 1998, slated for reprocessing at "Mayak" (Chelyabinsk-65) where the RT-1 plant is located. Reprocessing one ton of spent fuel generates 45 m³ high-level, 150 m³ medium-level and 2,000 m³ low-level liquid wastes.

High-level reprocessing wastes have been treated in many different ways over the last several decades. From March 1949 to November 1951, high-level reprocessing wastes at Mayak (then a military facility which produced plutonium for nuclear weapons) were dumped into the Techa River. Within this period, 2.8 million curies of radioactivity were released into the river, as a result of which 124,000 people in 41 settlements received radiation doses of various levels. Dumping of low- and medium-level liquid wastes in the Techa continued into the mid-1950s.

After 1951, high-level liquid wastes were stored in tanks. In 1957, one of these tanks exploded, with disastrous environmental consequences. After the explosion, research began on injection of wastes into underground "collection beds." The geology near the Mayak site was not considered suitable for this method of waste disposal, but large-scale use of deep-well injection began in the late 1960s at three facilities in Russia: Tomsk, Krasnoyarsk and Dimitrovgrad. A total of 46 million cubic meters of waste containing more than 2 billion curies of fission products have been injected into collection layers at liquid waste storage sites with an area of 24 square kilometers. The activity of the waste has decreased from its original level as a result of radioactive decay, and is now estimated at 800 million curies. Other hazardous wastes have been injected along with radioactive wastes.

Proponents of this method assure that the issue of deep underground storage of liquid wastes has been studied carefully and thoroughly, and is well monitored.⁵ References are made to the Inter-Ministerial Commission on Geological Means of Securing Safety of Radioactive Waste Storage (chaired by the vice-president of the Russian Academy of Sciences, N. P. Laverov). It has declared that deep underground storage of liquid waste is acceptable and sufficiently safe.⁶ Many geologists dispute this, and even N. P. Laverov has said that "direct disposal of liquid wastes is obviously more dangerous than that of solid wastes. Therefore solidification of liquid wastes is at the present time a general means of increasing safety of their storage."⁷

The scientific community does not have access to information about injection of radioactive wastes, and no independent expert analyses of this technology exist. Inquiries usually receive the response that "research is being conducted into injection of waste in deep underground earth layers, including some relating to 'conservation technologies.'"^8,9 It is said that discussion of this would "exert a negative influence on the choices for the optimal development of atomic energy" and even "ensuring military preparedness." ¹⁰ Another reason for concealing the scale of this activity is the following, unfortunately very real, fact: the transition from underground injection of liquid wastes to an alternative method of waste management requires significant financial resources and capital investments.⁸ Injection of liquid radioactive wastes of varying activity levels continues, in violation of environmental protection laws.

More recently at Mayak, high-level liquid wastes have been evaporated, fractionated, and then vitrified. So far, almost 13,000 m³ have been treated, producing 2,188 tons of vitrified material. Since the melter at the vitrification facility was shut down in 1997, having operated twice as long as its design lifetime, the most dangerous high-level liquid wastes have again been stored in tanks. Start-up of a new vitrification facility has been held up for financial and environmental reasons.

Medium-level wastes at Mayak are concentrated by evaporation and disposed of in above-ground reservoirs. The infamous Lake Karachai is one such reservoir-120 million curies were dumped into it during the reprocessing of only 150-250 tons of spent fuel. It is not clear what will be done with future medium-level reprocessing wastes, since the situation at Karachai is already disastrous. Additional hundreds of millions of curies of medium level wastes are contained in other reservoirs (see Table 3, Status of Radioactive Wastes from Spent Fuel Reprocessing at RT-1, Mayak).

In the cascading reservoirs at Mayak, 400 million m³ of low-level wastes with an activity of long-lived beta-emitting radionuclides of 300,000 curies have accumulated. Already, filtration from the reservoirs into the groundwater (10 million m³ per year) has contaminated a volume of 3.5 million to 5 million m³ of water with an activity of 0.9 million curies. The contamination has spread to a depth of 100 meters with an area of 10 km2, in the direction of the Mishelyak River. Strontium-90 contamination is spreading at a rate of 84 meters/year; cobalt-60, 51 meters/year.^8,10

Filtration from the reservoirs and the potential for their overflow due to catastrophic floods, similar to those which occurred in some regions in spring-summer 1998, could cause a breach in the last dam of the reservoir cascade and the release of more than 200 million m³ of contaminated water into the hydrologic system of the Techa River. According to some estimates, 215 million curies would end up in the Ob River (a major Siberian river into which the Techa River flows. The Ob, in turn, flows into the Arctic Ocean).

The ability of Mayak to reprocess additional spent fuel, considering the waste already accumulated, is reduced. The first task should be to treat existing waste, using the experience gained to date and existing technologies.

Naval operations and underground explosions

Two other areas of nuclear operations have produced significant quantities of liquid wastes: nuclear submarines and underground nuclear explosions. Operation of nuclear submarines in the military and civilian nuclear fleets presents a number of pressing problems in the northern and far eastern regions of Russia, where there is an insufficient capacity for nuclear waste management.⁹ Since ocean dumping was halted, wastes have been steadily accumulating in these regions.¹¹ The last dumping of liquid wastes into the Sea of Japan (400 m³, with an activity of 0.38 curies) occurred in September 1993.

A total of 10,000 to 12,000 m³ of liquid radioactive wastes is produced every year at naval facilities. Of this, 40% is from the Pacific Fleet. The specific activity of the wastes is from 10^-7 to 10^-2 curies/liter. Ten percent of these wastes have an activity at the higher end of this range, from 10^-3 to 10^-2 (0.001 to 0.01) curies/liter.

A portion of the liquid wastes generated by the military fleet (1,000-1,500 m³) are treated at the "Atomflot" liquid waste treatment plant in Murmansk. More than 2,500 m³ of liquid wastes have collected at the submarine construction center at Severodvinsk, where all of the storage tanks are full. Five underground tanks for liquid wastes are located at Andreeva Bay. ¹²

The "Onega" and "Amur" tankers were to be designated for the transport of liquid wastes to on-shore purification plants (coagulation and evaporation), and the resulting concentrates were to be stored in special tanks. However, the program for processing naval liquid wastes has been stopped: the shoreline facilities have not been built and processing facilities on the tankers are not operating. "Atomflot" could meet the needs of the civilian and the Northern fleets if a new purification plant were put into operation. Treatment of an additional 6,000 m³ year would help address the problems of liquid wastes for all nuclear ships of the Northern region -- financing is all that is needed.

The Murmansk shipping company has five nuclear-technical servicing ships. These are the "Imandra" (12 liquid wastes tanks), "Lotta," "Lepse" (one liquid waste tank) and "Volodarskii" floating storage facilities, the "Serebryanka" tanker for liquid waste storage and floating radiation measuring and control points. Nuclear submarines are serviced by several dozen barges.

A volume of 8,000 m³ of liquid wastes of varying activity and levels of salination has been collected from the Pacific Fleet. Three of five tankers are filled, and one is not operational. There are also four overflowing floating facilities for storage of spent fuel and liquid radioactive wastes, as well as small tankers. On-shore storage facilities, primarily three aging tanks at the Shkotovo-22 site at Sysoev Bay, are filled. There is interim liquid waste storage in Primore and Kamchatka. ¹³

The most serious problem with liquid radioactive wastes from the naval fleets are being addressed with international help, including financing from Finland, Norway, and Japan.

The question of liquid wastes formed in the cavities from underground nuclear explosions remains practically unnoticed. Study of them would allow the conclusion that significant volumes of contaminated masses, concentrated in cavities and surrounding areas, classify as long-term nuclear waste storage sites. ¹⁴ Leaking from them has impacted Prikame, Sakha (Yakutia), Astrakhan and Tyumen regions.

Conclusion

The federal program on "Management of radioactive waste and spent nuclear materials, their use and storage 1996-2005" has established that existing waste management capacities are not sufficient for treatment and reliable isolation of existing and newly generated spent fuel and liquid wastes. The amount of liquid waste is increasing not only through reprocessing of spent fuel, but also as a result of the decommissioning and dismantlement of nuclear power plants. The number of power plants that will be decommissioned will soon sharply increase, but this point is not currently taken into consideration by the Russian government.

Without having the means of guaranteeing environmental security and safe storage of existing spent fuel, Minatom publicly advocates reprocessing of spent fuel. But as this review shows, there is no unified government policy for liquid waste management.