Eight years after the entry into force of the Law on the provisions created for the decommissioning of nuclear power plants and the management of fuel irradiated in these plants (Law of 11 April 2003, as amended in 2007), the Belgian Minister for Climate and Energy wished to organize a round table on nuclear provisions aimed at examining the possibilities for improving this Law (see attached participant list), taking into account the experience gained and the assessments carried out, by ONDRAF/NIRAS among others within the scope of its _nuclear liabilities inventory_ mission.
ARGONA is a project within the European Commission 6th framework programme. The overall objective was to support transparency of decision-making processes in the radioactive waste programmes of the participating countries, and also of the European Union, by means of a greater degree of public participation.
Nuclear power programs and policies in the United States have been subject to environmental assessment under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) since 1971. NEPA documentation prepared for programmatic policy decision-making within the nuclear fuel cycle and concurrent federal policy are examined as they relate to radioactive waste management in this paper.
The objective of the National Insights was to develop as far as possible “a historical and strategic vision of the radioactive waste governance” for participants of a same country. While decision-making processes in radioactive waste management very often remain technically driven, there is a need to put forward and give substance to a more open and inclusive decision-making process. The notion of governance is often used to label this type of decision-making process.
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.
The long-term governance of radioactive waste is complex socio-technical issue. The disposition of radioactive waste is decided on ethical grounds, having to take into account a variety of other dimensions (society, economy, ecology, politics, time, space, and technology). Thereto, a study of variants is required. Decision theory, in principle, takes diverse options as a starting point begin as the basis of a decision.
This document develops further the questions offered to stakeholders in the Berlin Meeting (see Appendix). It describes mechanisms that local stakeholders can use to influence national decision-making processes in radioactive waste management.
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.
Czech Waste Management Annual Report
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.
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.
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.
After more than 20 years of carefully planned and reviewed scientific field work by the<br/>U.S. Department of Energy, the U.S. Geological Survey, and numerous other<br/>organizations, Secretary of Energy Abraham concluded in January that the Yucca<br/>Mountain site is suitable, within the meaning of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, for<br/>development as a permanent nuclear waste and spent fuel repository.
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.
In February 1983, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) identified a<br/>location in Deaf Smith County, Texas, as one of nine potentially acceptable<br/>sites for a mined geologic repository for spent nuclear fuel and high-level<br/>radioactive waste. The potentially acceptable site was subsequently narrowed<br/>to an area of 9 square miles.
The Monitored Retrievable Storage Review Commission herewith submits its<br/>final report as required by the Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1987,<br/>Public Law 100-203, as amended by Public Law 100-507.<br/>The Congress created the Commission to provide a report on the need for a<br/>Federal monitored retrievable storage facility (MRS) as part of the Nation's<br/>nuclear waste management system. In essence, Congress asked the Commission to<br/>review the U.S.
Report to the President from the Interagency Review Group on Nuclear Waste Management (IRG) established last March at the direction of the President. In October a draft report was offered for public review, and extensive comments were received. This final report presents the findings, policy considerations, and recommendations reached by the IRG as of this date.
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.
Over the past forty years, the development of the technology needed to isolate radioactive waste in underground rock systems has been found to be a formidable problem. This is especially the case in connection with high-level waste (HLW) after its removal from operations in nuclear power plants. There is also the additional problem of isolating low- and intermediate-level waste (LILW).
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.
