Asse: Criticism expressed by citizens’ initiatives not comprehensible

The Federal Office for Radiation Protection (BfS) objects to the criticism expressed by the Asse-II Coordination Committee (AK2). The allegation that BfS has misled the public is dishonest. None of the statements made by AK2 on the occasion of the press conference on 4 January 2010 bears close examination.

In an approach that is unequalled in Germany, the Federal Office for Radiation Protection (BfS) has been pursuing the way to the safe decommissioning of the Asse II mine. BfS provides comprehensive information to and involves the general public.

The current works of BfS deal with the evaluation of the three closure options – complete backfilling, relocation, or retrieval of the radioactive waste. This evaluation is based on a catalogue of criteria which – like the whole procedure – was discussed with all interested parties prior to the beginning of the works. It is planned to present as soon as possible the result of the comparative evaluation of these options to the public. Prior to a taking a final decision on which option will be further pursued concretely within the scope of a nuclear plan-approval procedure, BfS wishes to re-discuss the issue.

Upon request of the Asse Accompanying Group chaired by Landrat Jörg Röhmann, where also citizens’ initiatives are represented, an internal presentation of the BfS work results in January has been agreed.

The criticism of the option complete backfilling now expressed by the citizens’ initiative is not comprehensible. Together with the two other options, this variant was presented in detail to the public already months ago. Contrary to the statements of the citizens’ initiatives, the associated procedure is described in detail in the brochure “Insights into the Asse Mine” 6/09 quoted by them. The following is stated on page 1 about complete backfilling, a combined use of a special type of concrete for the accessible cavities and liquid backfilling of residual cavities: “In this case the radioactive waste would remain where it is presently stored, barriers in the area of the emplacement chambers would limit the release of harmful substances. The lower part of the mine would be flooded with a magnesium chloride solution which does not affect the easily soluble salt and whose purpose is to keep away the groundwater. The accessible areas of Asse would be backfilled with a special type of concrete and the shafts would be sealed in the end.” The expert reports presented on 3 October 2009 contain a detailed presentation of the possible procedure and can be read on the BfS website on the Asse repository. There you can also find video animations on the topic (in German).The question of concrete proofs of safety and the resulting planning criteria would only have to be answered in the next step, the nuclear plan-approval procedure.

As planned, all options are evaluated with their specific benefits and disadvantages. Pre-selecting one option or excluding one option in advance only repeat the mistakes made in the past instead of learning from them. Eventually, the key issue will be how the best possible, permanent safety for the population and the environment can be provided under the difficult conditions BfS found one year ago.