Siting Experience Documents Only
Country
Keywords
Local Liaison Committees and National Association of Local Liaison Committees: the French experience
Local Liaison Committees and National Association of Local Liaison Committees: the French experience
In the context of the governance of nuclear activities, especially in the field of the radioactive waste management, the self-structuring of civil society is a necessary condition of the citizens’ action. The experience of French “Commissions Locales d’Information” (CLIs) and their national federation the “Association Nationale des Commissions Locales d’Information” (ANCLI) represent an interesting and original example of local actors empowerment. In France, Local Information Commissions (CLI) are attached to most of the nuclear sites.
Two Citizen Task Forces and the Challenge of the Evolving Nuclear Waste Siting Process
Two Citizen Task Forces and the Challenge of the Evolving Nuclear Waste Siting Process
Siting any nuclear waste facility is problematic in today's climate of distrust toward nuclear agencies and fear of nuclear waste. This study compares and contrasts the siting and public participation processes as two citizen task forces dealt with their difficult responsibilities. Though one dealt with a high level waste (Monitored Retrievable Storage - MRS) proposal in Tennessee in 1985-6 and the other with a proposed low level waste facility in Illinois (1988 and still ongoing), the needs of citizen decision makers were very similar.
D1-12 Prospective Case Study - United Kingdom
D1-12 Prospective Case Study - United Kingdom
Recommendation Group 8
Recommendation Group 8
Recommendation Group 7 worked on expertise, the site selection process and compensation
Recommendation Group 7
Recommendation Group 7
D1-10 Prospective Case Study - Slovenia
D1-10 Prospective Case Study - Slovenia
D1-11 Prospective Case Study - Spain
D1-11 Prospective Case Study - Spain
D1-8 Prospective Case Study - France
D1-8 Prospective Case Study - France
Report of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future - Report to the Secretary of Energy
Report of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future - Report to the Secretary of Energy
The Blue Ribbon Commission on America_s Nuclear Future (BRC) was formed by the Secretary<br>of Energy at the request of the President to conduct a comprehensive review of policies for<br>managing the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle and recommend a new strategy. It was cochaired<br>by Rep. Lee H. Hamilton and Gen. Brent Scowcroft. Other Commissioners are Mr.<br>Mark H. Ayers, the Hon. Vicky A. Bailey, Dr. Albert Carnesale, Sen. Pete Domenici, Ms. Susan<br>Eisenhower, Sen. Chuck Hagel, Mr. Jonathan Lash, Dr. Allison M. Macfarlane, Dr.
Section 6 - Report of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future - Report to the Secretary of Energy
Section 6 - Report of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future - Report to the Secretary of Energy
The Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future (BRC) was formed by the Secretary of Energy at the request of the President to conduct a comprehensive review of policies for managing the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle and recommend a new strategy
Defining an Affected Community
Defining an Affected Community
The long term management of radioactive waste creates site specific issues associated with storage and disposal facilities and the transportation of radioactive material. The resolution of these, sometimes controversial, issues requires an appreciation and accommodation of community issues and an essential element of these activities is an approach to defining the extent and composition of communities affected by radioactive waste management. <br><br>A community perspective can provide an insight into the relationship between a facility and people living in its vicinity.
Section 3.4 - Report of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future - Report to the Secretary of Energy
Section 3.4 - Report of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future - Report to the Secretary of Energy
The Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future (BRC) was formed by the Secretary of Energy at the request of the President to conduct a comprehensive review of policies for managing the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle and recommend a new strategy
Summary of Comments for the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future
Summary of Comments for the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future
Summary of Comments for the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future by Professor Hank C. Jenkins-Smith, University of Oklahoma
WP 2 Appendix 4 Estudio Sociológico Sobre La A.M.A.C. Y El Hecho Nuclear En España
WP 2 Appendix 4 Estudio Sociológico Sobre La A.M.A.C. Y El Hecho Nuclear En España
LONG TERM GOVERNANCE FOR RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT ANNEX OF THE FINAL REPORT OF COWAM2 - WORK PACKAGE 4
LONG TERM GOVERNANCE FOR RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT ANNEX OF THE FINAL REPORT OF COWAM2 - WORK PACKAGE 4
The purpose of COWAM2 Work Package 4 (WP4) on "e;long term governance"e; was to identify, discuss and analyse the institutional, ethical, economic and legal considerations raised by long term radioactive waste storage or disposal on the three interrelated issues of: (i) responsibility and ownership of radioactive waste over long term, (ii) continuity of local dialogue between stakeholders and monitoring of radioactive waste management facilities, and (iii) compensation and sustainable development.
Recommendation Group 3
Recommendation Group 3
Long Term Governance for Radioactive Waste Management WP4
Long Term Governance for Radioactive Waste Management WP4
The purpose of COWAM2 Work Package 4 (WP4) on "e;long term governance"e; was to identify, discuss and analyse the institutional, ethical, economic and legal considerations raised by long term radioactive waste storage or disposal on the three interrelated issues of: (i) responsibility and ownership of radioactive waste over long term, (ii) continuity of local dialogue between stakeholders and monitoring of radioactive waste management facilities, and (iii) compensation and sustainable development.
Guidance on the Selection of PTA Tools: For Stakeholders involved in Radioactive Waste Governance WP1
Guidance on the Selection of PTA Tools: For Stakeholders involved in Radioactive Waste Governance WP1
This research on "e;Guidance on the selection of PTA tools for stakeholders involved in radioactive waste governance"e; was performed under the umbrella of COWAM2-'Work Package 1' (WP1). Through a dialogue on enhancing involvement at a local level, WP1 allows local stakeholders to examine the issues they face in building a democratic local governance process. WP1 also tests how Participatory Technology Assessment (PTA) methods can offer a consensual framework and a platform for deliberative co-decision among scientific and societal actors at the local level.
Enhancing the Role of State and Local Governments in America's Nuclear Future: An Idea Whose Time Has Come
Enhancing the Role of State and Local Governments in America's Nuclear Future: An Idea Whose Time Has Come
The Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future was formed by the Secretary of<br/>Energy at the direction of the President. The Commission was formed to conduct a<br/>comprehensive review of policies for managing the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle, including<br/>all alternatives for the storage, processing, and disposal of civilian and defense used nuclear fuel,<br/>high–level waste, and materials derived from nuclear activities.
Recommendation Group 6
Recommendation Group 6
REFLECTIONS ON THE INFLUENCE OF THE LOCAL ACTORS ON THE NATIONAL NUCLEAR WASTE MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK
Recommendation Group 4
Recommendation Group 4
Genesis of an Approach: From Public non-participation to Participation in a LILW Site Selection Process in Slovenia WP1
Genesis of an Approach: From Public non-participation to Participation in a LILW Site Selection Process in Slovenia WP1
Searching for the location of risky or unpleasant objects is becoming increasingly difficult task. Slovenia is for the number of years now in the process of search for the location of the low and intermediate waste (LILW) repository. Social acceptability of this facility is currently the main problem in this search. Efforts in this direction are presented in all its diversity, with weaknesses and successes, addressing also the context of the whole process, but especially considering different aspects of public participation.
Recommendation Group 1
Recommendation Group 1
European-level Guidelines for the Inclusive Governance of Radioactive Waste Management
European-level Guidelines for the Inclusive Governance of Radioactive Waste Management
CIP (Community Waste Management In Practice) is a research action gathering a wide spectrum of stakeholders from five European countries, interested in how society should manage the radioactive wastes that result from nuclear power production and/or from medical, military or industrial applications.