Description
The effects of radiation on animals and plants from any repository-derived radionuclides (or their progeny) that might reach the biosphere.
Category
Categorisation as a Feature, Event and/or Process.
Features
are physical components of the disposal system and environment being assessed. Examples include waste packaging, backfill, surface soils. Features typically interact with one another via processes and in some cases events.Events
are dynamic interactions among features that occur over time periods that are short compared to the safety assessment timeframe such as a gas explosion or meteorite impact.- "Processes" are issues or dynamic interactions among features that generally occur over a significant proportion of the safety assessment timeframe and may occur over the whole of this timeframe. Events and processes may be coupled to one another (i.e. may influence one another).
The classification of a FEP as an event or process depends upon the assessment context, because the classification is undertaken with reference to an assessment timeframe. In this generic IFEP List, many IFEPs are classified as both Events and Processes; users will need to decide which of these classifications is relevant to their context and its timeframes.
- Process
Relevance to Performance and Safety
The “Relevance to Performance and Safety” field contains an explanation of how the IFEP might influence the performance and safety of the disposal system under consideration through its impact on the evolution of the repository system and on the release, migration and/or uptake of repository-derived contaminants.
For non-human biota, the goal in safety assessment is usually to evaluate potential effects at a population or community level. This involves assessing the potential risks of unacceptable mortality, decreased growth, or reproductive impairment for populations exposed to any repository-derived radionuclides (and/or their progeny) that might reach the biosphere. If the effects are widespread throughout a population of some non-human biota, there could also be consequential effects, such as disruption of food webs or ecosystems.
2000 List
A reference to the related FEP(s) within the 2000 NEA IFEP List.
Related References
-
IAEA (), Modelling of Biota Dose Effects. Report of Working Group 6: Biota Dose Effects Modelling of EMRAS II Topical Heading Reference Approaches for Biota Dose Assessment, Environmental Modelling for RAdiation Safety (EMRAS II) Programme, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria, ISBN 978–92–0–101114–5, http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/Publications/PDF/TE-1737_web.pdf
-
Beresford, N, Brown, J, Copplestone, D, Garnier-Laplace, J, Howard, BJ, Larsson, C-M, Oughton, O, Pröhl, G, Zinger, I (eds.) (2007) D-ERICA: An integrated approach to the assessment and management of environmental risks from ionising radiation. Description of purpose, methodology and application, ERICA, http://nora.nerc.ac.uk/2146/1/D-ERICAFeb07+AnnexesAB.pdf
-
Vives i Batlle, J., Jones, S.R. and Copplestone, D. (2015) A methodology for Ar-41, Kr-85,88 and Xe-131m,133 wildlife dose assessment, Journal of Environmental Radioactivity, 144, 152-161, http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0265931X15000685
-
J Vives i Batlle, D Copplestone, SR Jones. (2012) Allometric methodology for the assessment of radon exposures to wildlife, Sci Tot Environ, 427-428, 50-59, http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969712004937?via%3Dihub