W4 | Site with best possible safety?
Site with best possible safety?
Main Session Organizers: Jan Graefje, Guido Bracke
Posters
| Attendance Thu, 18 Sep, 17:20–18:20 (CEST)|Poster area
Posters
Thu, 17:20

Posters: Thu, 18 Sep, 17:20–18:20 | Poster area

P31
|
safeND2025-149
Opportunities for accelerating the site selection process for a high-level radioactive waste repository in Germany based on the Site Selection Act 
Guido Bracke, Torben Weyand, Jan Gräfje, Christoph Borkel, and Jochen Ahlswede

In the recent past, the duration and scope of the site selection procedure for a high-level radioactive waste repository in Germany were heavily discussed [1-3]. Multiple schedules were addressed, all concluded that the site selection procedure will at least endure multiple decades [4-5]. In order to minimize burdens and risks for future generations, to minimise above-ground storage and to maintain trust in the process of finding a solution to nuclear waste disposal, it seems imperative to speed up the current site selection process.

Therefore, the Federal Office for the Safety of Nuclear Waste Management (BASE) published a position statement [6] on acceleration potentials in the site selection procedure with specific suggestions on how the search procedure for a site for the high-level radioactive waste repository could be accelerated by years to decades. Some of the suggestions require changes to the site selection procedure and the corresponding legislation, but are compatible with the principles as laid out in article 1 of the site selection act. The following points were outlined as central acceleration potentials in the site selection process:

  • Use of modern exploration methods and drilling techniques instead of exploratory mines.
  • Merger of phases II and III of the site selection procedure.
  • Limit on the number of siting regions to a maximum of six at the end of Phase I.
  • Linking the work on the mining law approval procedure with the submission of the siting region proposal.
  • Possibility of year-round exploration work through legal adjustments.
  • Facilitation of exploration and access rights for the repository search.

Debates are ongoing and also other stakeholders, namely BGE and NBG, published position statements [7-8], where the potential for acceleration is discussed. Some of the proposals could be implemented in the future, while others require decisions and actions to be taken before the end of Phase I of the Siting Process to become effective. A realistic timetable covering the activities of all actors in the site selection process is a prerequisite for the timely and successful realisation of a deep geological repository.

 

[1] Röhlig, K.-J. (2023) atw 68 (4), 52-61.

[2] Thomauske, B. (2023) atw 68 (3), 7-22.

[3] Entsorgungskommision (2024) https://www.entsorgungskommission.de/sites/default/files/reports/ESK_Positionspapier_ZEIT_AuswahlverfahrenBeschleunigungspotenziale_ESK118_251024.pdf

[4] BASE (2024) https://www.base.bund.de/DE/themen/fa/soa/documents/PaSta.html

[5] BGE (2022) https://www.endlagersuche-infoplattform.de/SharedDocs/IP6/BASE/DE/20221028_Anlage2_Abschaetzung_Zeitbedarfe_uebertaegige_untertaegige_Erkundung.pdf;jsessionid=D0C95A5340D3F80784E0D326AC7EC034.2_cid339?__blob=publicationFile&v=6

[6] BASE (2024) https://www.base.bund.de/shareddocs/stellungnahmen/de/2025/base-beschleunigungspotentiale-endlagersuche.html

[7] BGE (2025) https://www.bge.de/fileadmin/user_upload/Standortsuche/Wesentliche_Unterlagen/05_-_Meilensteine/20250130_Diskussionsvorschlag_Beschleunigung_Standortauswahlverfahren_barrierefrei.pdf

[8] NBG (2025) https://www.nationales-begleitgremium.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/DE/Downloads_Empfehlungen/NBG-Empfehlungen_5_Taetigkeitsbereicht.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=2

How to cite: Bracke, G., Weyand, T., Gräfje, J., Borkel, C., and Ahlswede, J.: Opportunities for accelerating the site selection process for a high-level radioactive waste repository in Germany based on the Site Selection Act, Third interdisciplinary research symposium on the safety of nuclear disposal practices, Berlin, Germany, 17–19 Sep 2025, safeND2025-149, https://doi.org/10.5194/safend2025-149, 2025.

P32
|
safeND2025-166
|
How safety concepts can be rejected for reasons of safety 
Martin Navarro

(Abstract for workshop W4 at SafeND 2025)

In the German site selection procedure, clay stone, salt rock, and crystalline rock are permissible host rocks. On this basis, the site with the best possible safety has to be selected from a large number of alternative sites which requires considerable resources. Reducing the effort and duration of the site selection procedure is therefore of great interest.

An efficient way of achieving this goal would be to reject certain host rocks and their associated safety concepts. That this could be justifiable from a safety perspective, was shown in project METIENS. METIENS was conducted by the Federal Office for the Safety of Nuclear Waste Management and investigated the problem of justifying site rejection decisions by means of long-term safety assessments.

METIENS identified several ways of increasing the efficiency of the site selection procedure in connection with safety comparisons. The presentation will focus on one of these ways. It will show that it is possible to justify the rejection of safety concepts based on safety arguments without needing to draw on weaker arguments of technical feasibility or efficiency. The safety argument does not require substantial site characterization but only an early elicitation of consensual and safety related conceptual preferences.

How to cite: Navarro, M.: How safety concepts can be rejected for reasons of safety, Third interdisciplinary research symposium on the safety of nuclear disposal practices, Berlin, Germany, 17–19 Sep 2025, safeND2025-166, https://doi.org/10.5194/safend2025-166, 2025.