The timetable for the repository search

Germany needs a final repository deep underground to safely accommodate its high-level radioactive waste from the use of nuclear energy. The Bundesgesellschaft für Endlagerung mbH (BGE) has announced that the search for a site for a high-level radioactive waste repository will take considerably longer than previously known. According to the Site Selection Act, the aim is for the Bundestag to decide on the site in 2031. BASE had therefore repeatedly requested the company to submit a more specific timetable in the past.

According to public announcements, the timeframe for a decision on the site is now said to be 2046 to 2068. The Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (BMUV) wants to invite the parties involved for discussions on this. The Federal Office for the Safety of Nuclear Waste Management (BASE) sees fundamental questions arising in this context, which it will introduce into the further discussion.

Background:

As a federally-owned company, the BGE is in charge of the site selection. Its current legal mandate is to identify so-called siting regions in Germany on the basis of available geological data, and to submit these in a proposal to BASE. Following a public discussion and an examination of the legal conformity of the procedure, phase 1 will end with a Bundestag decision on siting regions to be examined for suitability in greater depth during phase 2.

The search for a repository has been deliberately designed as a self-learning procedure. The actors are required to scrutinise their own actions, and it must be possible to consider new findings and results. BASE is committed to this fundamental premise. The new time horizon poses a number of fundamental questions for nuclear waste management:

1. What are the reasons (eg. new findings) for the now mentioned timeframe (2046-2068)?
2. What are the implications of the BGE's new time requirement for a further five years until the proposal of siting regions for the planned regional conferences and the securing of sites in accordance with Section 21 (StandAG)?
3. The Final Repository Commission had drawn up two scenarios. The worst-case assumption was that a decision on the site would be made in 2079, assuming phase 1 would take four to five years. According to the new timetable, ten years will be needed for the partial step of proposing siting regions within phase 1 alone. Yet, what are the assumptions underlying the shorter time requirements for all further stages?
4. The BGE has announced that, from 2024 onwards, it will report annually on the reduction of areas as compared with the interim report on sub-areas (status September '20). How can this announcement be reconciled with the StandAG, which reserves a decision on the narrowing-down of the siting regions for the legislature?
5. Following a siting decision by the Bundestag, the planning, licensing and construction of the repository will take about 20 more years. This would mean that, according to the cited assumptions of the BGE, the first high-level radioactive waste could be emplaced between 2066 and 2088. What impact would such periods have on the design and safety of the interim storage facilities, the licences of which will gradually expire from 2035 onwards?
6. There is still no disposal perspective for about half of the expected low- and intermediate-level radioactive waste from Germany. This is currently connected to the decision on the location of a HAW repository. What consequences does this have for the interim storage/safety of LAW/MAW waste?
7. Like the search for a repository, interim storage is financed by the Kenfo public fund. What does the extension of the procedure mean for the remaining funds for final storage? What are the consequences of the interim storage extension?
8. What new boundary conditions are there in view of the attacks on nuclear facilities in Ukraine and the debate about prolonged use of nuclear energy?