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.

The purpose of COWAM2 Work Package 4 (WP4) on &quote;long term governance&quote; 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.

The investigation consists of three parts and shall provide an input to the – empirical – PTA-2 study to be undertaken by SCK•CEN (called “lens”):<br>A. Compilation of – selected – existing PTA methods and procedures identifying requisites, practices, benefits, and challenges to answer the key questions in the context of WP1 about a PTA “toolbox”: “What can you apply, when can you apply, and what is needed to apply?” The multi-dimensional context of a possible “PTA situation” is analysed; suitable and nonsuitable methods, techniques and procedures are discussed.<br>B.

The purpose of COWAM2 Work Package 4 (WP4) on &quote;long term governance&quote; 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.

This research on &quote;Guidance on the selection of PTA tools for stakeholders involved in radioactive waste governance&quote; was performed under the umbrella of COWAM2-&#39;Work Package 1&#39; (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.

REFLECTIONS ON THE INFLUENCE OF THE LOCAL ACTORS ON THE NATIONAL NUCLEAR WASTE MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK

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.

Work Package 2 (WP2) focused on the ways in which local stakeholders can influence national decision-making processes on radioactive waste management (RWM). The participants in WP2 were particularly interested in examining how local stakeholders could contribute to national debates. Their interest stemmed from the fact that participants from France, Spain and the United Kingdom — who made up the majority of the WP2 group — were engaged, as stakeholders, in the decision-making processes that were under way in each of those countries.

Despite in Romania nuclear research activities were started in early 50s, the nuclear power is very young. First NPP, Cernavoda Unit 1, about 600 MWe, was in operation since 1996. Next unit (Cernavoda Unit2) will be in operation at the end of 2007. Therefore, a relative low amount of high level waste was produced. However, some problems already exists in Romania, mainly related to historical radioactive wastes released by nuclear industry and research.

History shows that the search for sites for radioactive waste management facilities has been marred by conflicts and delays. Affected communities have often objected that their concerns and interests were not addressed. In response, institutions have progressively turned away from the traditional “decide, announce and defend” model, and are learning to “engage, interact and co-operate”. This shift has fostered the emergence of partnerships between the proponent of the facility and the potential host community, as shown in a recent NEA study.

This report focuses on public meetings as a vehicle for public participation in nuclear waste management. The nature of public meetings is reviewed and the functions served by meetings highlighted. The range of participants and their concerns are addressed, including a review of the participants from past nuclear waste management meetings. A sound understanding of the expected participants allows DOE to tailor elements of the meeting, such as notification, format, and agenda to accommodate the attendees.

The director of the Task Force on Civilian Radioactive Waste Management of the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board, United States Department of Energy, asked the National Academy of Public Administration, to convene a group of approximately one dozen individuals to attend a twoday &quot;state-of-the-art&quot; workshop on the issue of how institutions establish, maintain, or recover trust and confidence among significant members of their task environments.

Survey research on nuclear power issues conducted in the late 1970s has determined that nuclear waste management is now considered to be one of the most important nuclear power issues both by the U.S. public and by key leadership groups. The purpose of this research was to determine the importance placed on specific issues associated with high-level waste disposal. In addition, policy option choices were asked regarding the siting of both low-level and high-level nuclear waste repositories.