EURAD deliverable D9.17 ROUTES – Implementation of the ROUTES ICS action plan second phase

The focus of the work of ROUTES Task 7 on Interaction with Civil Society (ICS) during year 3 has been investigations on how the pillars of Aarhus convention and a broader understanding of transparency by Civil Society (CS) can be transposed into Radioactive Waste Management (RWM), in particular in establishment of Radioactive Waste (RW) facilities in different national contexts. Therefore, the deliverable D9.17 is entitled “Implementation of ROUTES action plan second phase: Transparency in establishment of national radioactive waste facilities: Criteria for good transparency, national case studies and recommendations”. In this deliverable the results of the investigations are provided, including comments, suggestions, questions, and other observations collected in interaction with EURAD participants and the CS larger group. 

The report starts with an overview of the ICS action plan with the main issues for investigation of Task 7 in the following years and the focus of the present deliverable. In addition, the detailed structure of the report is given. In section 2, some criteria for transparency in the development of national RW facilities are proposed based on the Radioactive Waste Directive, the Aarhus Convention and the BEPPER report. Section 3 deals with the questionnaire submitted to the ROUTES members and to the CS larger group members and received responds. It was devoted to the transparency in the establishment of national radioactive waste facilities and included five topics of effective access to information, public participation, justice (Aarhus Convention), resources (BEPPER report) and T&PP in the development of the national programmes on RWM submitted to the EC (Waste Directive). Section 4 presents recommendations for the transparency and public participation derived from the analyses of the national case studies on transparency in establishment of national radioactive waste facilities for different European countries: Czech Republic, Denmark, Germany, Greenland, France, Netherland, Slovakia, Sweden and United-Kingdom (the national cases are accessible in the appendix of the deliverable). Based on the descriptions and analyses, conclusions with general recommendations from the case studies and ICS that could more generally apply for the establishment of national RW facilities are provided in section 4. 

The ongoing interactions and progress of activities in relation to Tasks 2-8 in ROUTES that have taken place during year 3 are reported in section 5. Finally, some ideas of what the next investigations will be the focus of Task 7 work during year 4 are reported in section 6.