The storage of radioactive waste is a problem. The question is how government and society can arrive at solutions. It is therefore of importance to know how other countries deal with this problem of radioactive waste. The Dutch Commission for the Disposal of Radioactive Waste (CORA) asked us to make a concise survey of one or two discussion in Western countries about the aboveground or underground storage of nuclear waste, mainly concerning the last 10 years. This to learn more about experiences in public participation abroad. CORA started its research program on retrievability a few years ago. This study presents an overview of lessons learned from decision-making processes in eight countries. It will be of use for a next phase of nuclear waste research in The Netherlands, which will likely start in 2001.

In the process of selecting countries, we took into account the developments we had been aware of to a certain degree, because of our earlier study on ethical and social aspects of retrievable waste storage. Second criteria was to select these countries from which we expected to collect relevant and easy accessible information. Because of the available time we limited the amount of countries to eight--Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom. Concerning Spain, this is a brief chapter since, during this study, the development of a new discussion procedure was halted unexpectedly by the Spanish Senate.
Given the mandate of the study, this report deals with discussions about the storage or disposal of nuclear waste. An analysis of technical concepts, for instance about the pros and cons of reprocessing, will not be found in this report.

For each country we have a corresponding structure. We start with the status of the nuclear power program. Then we deal briefly with radioactive waste production, the categories of radioactive waste, the amounts produced or are to be produced, where it is presently stored and who is responsible for the storage. It is followed by one or two cases.
For each country, we tried to find information contacts, representing both environmental organisations as well as governmental authorities dealing with nuclear waste issues. Unfortunately, those contacts were not found in all countries. The draft texts were submitted to the contacts for a check on the correct presentation and interpretation of the information. The responsibility for the conclusions, however, remain solely with the authors.

Although the objective was to make a survey country by country, we compared the outcomes in the light of a number of themes and derived eight points for attention. A thorough comparison would have required more time than had been available for this report. Reports and studies dated later than July 1999 were not used for this study.
 

Robert Jan van den Berg             Herman Damveld
Wageningen                                 Groningen

January 2000