Comparative Analysis of Scenario Construction Methods in Major Geological Disposal Programs and Conceptual Considerations for Application in Korea

Seungki Hong; Sewook Oh; Byung-Gon Chae; Eui-Seob Park

doi:10.7474/TUS.2026.36.4.327

All Issue

2026 Vol.36, Issue 4 Preview Page Next Page

Case Study

Comparative Analysis of Scenario Construction Methods in Major Geological Disposal Programs and Conceptual Considerations for Application in Korea 주요 심층처분 프로그램의 시나리오 구성방법 비교와 국내 적용을 위한 개념적 검토

31 August 2026. pp. 327-351

PDF XML

Abstract

In long-term safety assessments for deep geological disposal of high-level radioactive waste, the future behavior of the disposal system is represented by scenarios and evaluated quantitatively, and Features, Events and Processes (FEPs) are used in various ways throughout this process. This study compares disposal programs in France, Switzerland, Germany, Japan, Finland, Sweden, and the United States in terms of the starting point, construction process, resulting scenarios, and implementation in quantitative assessment. Recurring procedural characteristics were organized into four types: causal-tracing, FEP grouping-and-integration, framework-first, and evolution-pathway; these are neither official nor mutually exclusive classifications used by the national programs. FEPs are used differently across programs for causal tracing, grouping or integration, evolution analysis, or completeness checking. Under current Korean conditions, where a disposal site has not yet been determined, each method can be conceptually examined using representative geological environments and FEP lists, and geological and rock engineering information can be linked, depending on the method, to FEP causal relationships, state variables, safety-function degradation, or long-term system evolution. As site-specific conditions and data are secured, scenarios and calculation conditions should be specified with traceable documentation of their rationale. This comparison does not identify a preferred method for Korea.

Keywords

High-Level radioactive waste

Deep geological disposal

FEP

Scenario construction method

Safety assessment

고준위방사성폐기물 심층처분의 장기 안전성평가에서는 처분시스템의 미래 거동을 시나리오로 구성하여 정량평가하며, 특징·사건·과정(FEP)은 이 과정에서 다양하게 활용된다. 본 연구는 프랑스, 스위스, 독일, 일본, 핀란드, 스웨덴 및 미국의 심층처분 프로그램을 대상으로 시나리오 구성의 시작점, 도출과정, 도출 시나리오 및 정량평가 구현방식을 비교하였다. 반복적으로 나타나는 절차적 특징을 인과추적형, FEP 그룹화·통합형, 상위틀 선행형, 진화경로형의 네 유형으로 정리하였으며, 이는 각국의 공식 분류나 상호 배타적 구분이 아니다. FEP는 프로그램에 따라 인과관계 추적, 그룹화·통합, 진화분석 또는 누락 확인 등에 활용되었다. 국내에서는 부지 미확정 조건에서도 대표 지질환경과 FEP 목록으로 각 방법을 개념적으로 검토할 수 있으며, 지질·암반공학적 정보는 방법에 따라 FEP 인과관계, 상태변수, 안전기능 저하 또는 장기진화와 연계될 수 있다. 부지특정 및 자료 확보 단계에서는 시나리오와 계산조건을 구체화하고 근거를 추적 가능하게 문서화하는 것이 중요하며, 본 결과는 특정 방법의 국내 적합성을 의미하지 않는다.

키워드

고준위방사성폐기물

심층처분

특징·사건·과정

시나리오 구성방법

안전성평가

References

Andra, 2005, Dossier 2005 Argile – Tome: Safety evaluation of a geological repository. Andra, December 2005.

Choi, S.B., Kihm, Y.H., Kim, E., and Cheon, D.S., 2020, Rock mechanical aspects in site characterization for HLW geological disposal: Current status and case studies. Tunnel & Underground Space, 30(2), 136-148.

Freeze, G., Voegele, M., Vaughn, P., Prouty, J., Nutt, W.M., Hardin, E., and Sevougian, S.D., 2013, Generic deep geologic disposal safety case. Revision 1, FCRD-UFD-2012-000146, SAND2013-0974P, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA.

IAEA, 2011, Geological disposal facilities for radioactive waste. Specific Safety Guide No. SSG-14, IAEA, Vienna, Austria.

Kang, C.H., Jeong, J.T., and Choi, J.W., 2012, A study on the development of the FEP and scenario for the HLW disposal in Korea. Journal of the Korean Radioactive Waste Society, 10(3), 133-141.

10.7733/jkrws.2012.10.3.133

Kim, H., Park, C.H., Park, E.S., and Jung, Y.B., 2021, Introduction on site-descriptive modeling for site selection of deep geological disposal in Sweden. Tunnel & Underground Space, 31(2), 111-124.

Mayer, K.-M., Beuth, T., and Bracke, G., 2019, Szenarienentwicklung für verschiedene Wirtsgesteine und Konzepte (GRS-525). Gesellschaft für Anlagen- und Reaktorsicherheit gGmbH, Köln, Garching bei München, Berlin, and Braunschweig.

Na, T.Y., Chae, B.G., and Park, E.S., 2023, A case study of site selection processes for high level radioactive waste (HLW) deep geological disposal in foreign countries. Journal of the Geological Society of Korea, 59(3), 473-494.

10.14770/jgsk.2023.037

Na, T.Y., Chae, B.G., Park, E.S., and Kim, M.J., 2024, Comparative analysis of siting criteria of high-level radioactive waste disposal in leading countries. The Journal of Engineering Geology, 34(1), 117-136.

10.9720/KSEG.2024.1.117

Nagra, 2002a, Project Opalinus Clay: Safety report — Demonstration of disposal feasibility for spent fuel, vitrified high-level waste and long-lived intermediate-level waste (Entsorgungsnachweis). Nagra Technical Report NTB 02-05, Nagra, Wettingen, Switzerland.

Nagra, 2002b, Project Opalinus Clay: FEP management for safety assessment. Nagra Technical Report NTB 02-23, Nagra, Wettingen, Switzerland.

Nuclear Waste Management Organization of Japan (NUMO), 2021, The NUMO pre-siting SDM-based safety case. NUMO-TR-21-01, NUMO, Tokyo, Japan.

Posiva Oy, 2012a, Safety case for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel at Olkiluoto: Features, events and processes 2012. POSIVA 2012-07, Posiva Oy, Eurajoki, Finland.

Posiva Oy, 2012b, Safety case for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel at Olkiluoto: Assessment of radionuclide release scenarios for the repository system 2012. POSIVA 2012-09, Posiva Oy, Eurajoki, Finland.

Posiva Oy, 2013, Safety case for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel at Olkiluoto: Performance assessment 2012. POSIVA 2012-04, Posiva Oy, Eurajoki, Finland.

SKB, 2010, FEP report for the safety assessment SR-Site. SKB TR-10-45, Svensk Kärnbränslehantering AB, Stockholm, Sweden.

SKB, 2011, Long-term safety for the final repository for spent nuclear fuel at Forsmark: Main report of the SR-Site project. SKB TR-11-01, Volumes I–III, Svensk Kärnbränslehantering AB, Stockholm, Sweden.

Information

Publisher :Korean Society for Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering
Publisher(Ko) :한국암반공학회
Journal Title :Tunnel and Underground Space
Journal Title(Ko) :터널과 지하공간
Volume : 36
No :4
Pages :327-351
Received Date : 2026-08-11
Revised Date : 2026-08-21
Accepted Date : 2026-08-21
DOI :https://doi.org/10.7474/TUS.2026.36.4.327

Tunnel and Underground SpaceISSN:1225-1275(Print) 2287-1748(Online)한국암반공학회

All Issue