Radioactive Waste Management — WIA-ENE-026
This chapter is anchored in the recommendations accumulated since 2000 by the OECD/NEA Forum on Stakeholder Confidence (FSC) and in IAEA Safety Standards GSR Part 1 §3.3 on stakeholder engagement. It covers how citizens, host communities, regulators, industry, and international organizations jointly build trust across the decision-making lifecycle of radioactive waste management. The WIA-ENE-026 standard wraps stakeholder engagement history inside a single envelope class, StakeholderEngagementRecord, so that the operator maintains identical traceability across IAEA Joint Convention national reports, OECD/NEA FSC workshops, and domestic regulator hearings.
The OECD/NEA FSC produced a four-stage trust-building model through the 1999-2000 workshop series: (1) Awareness — recognition that a waste issue exists, (2) Understanding — quantitative grasp of risk, cost, and benefit, (3) Engagement — substantive participation in decisions, and (4) Confidence — societal acceptance of site, technology, and institutional choices. The WIA-ENE-026 envelope engagementMaturity field carries this four-stage value as an enum (AWARE/UNDERSTAND/ENGAGE/CONFIDENT), and the reference simulator panel 5 (Transport Planning) computes per-site maturity scores automatically.
IAEA Safety Standards GSR Part 1 §3.3 mandates that the regulatory body institutionalize stakeholder participation in (a) the licensing application stage, (b) the site selection stage, (c) the decommissioning end stage, and (d) the repository closure stage. In Korea, NSSC Notice 2014-3 and Article 8 of the High-Level Radioactive Waste Management Special Act (enacted 9 January 2024) define site selection committees, public consultation, and parliamentary reporting. The WIA envelope participationProcedure field carries IAEA, OECD/NEA, and domestic procedure identifiers concurrently for multi-jurisdiction reporting.
The OECD/NEA Stakeholder Involvement in Decision Making: A Short Guide to Issues, Approaches and Resources (2015) codifies seven principles: (1) Early involvement, (2) Transparency, (3) Inclusiveness, (4) Iterative process, (5) Trust-building, (6) Adaptability, and (7) Resource adequacy. The WIA-ENE-026 Phase 2 endpoint /stakeholder/engagement-plan/validate scores an operator's plan against these seven principles.
The Finnish Onkalo case (operated by Posiva Oy, operating licence November 2023) is the FSC-cited model. Posiva conducted 152 formal consultations, approximately 1,400 informal consultations, and twice-yearly public tours with the Eurajoki municipal council across 32 years from initial site selection in 1983 through construction licence in 2015. Local resident approval rose from 36% in 1993 to 71% in 2018 (Posiva Sustainability Report 2019). The simulator panel 5 (Transport Planning) compares the trust index of Onkalo, SKB Forsmark, WIPP, and the Gyeongju repository as a time series.
OECD/NEA FSC partitions site selection procedures into three models: Top-Down (central government designation), Bottom-Up (voluntary municipal application), and Hybrid. Finland, Sweden, Canada, and France adopted Bottom-Up or Hybrid procedures, while the United States Yucca Mountain is recorded as a Top-Down failure case (funding suspended in 2009 under the Obama administration). Korea's Gyeongju Low- and Intermediate-Level Repository, decided by 89.5% approval in the 2 November 2005 referendum, is a Bottom-Up case, and the High-Level repository is currently proceeding via a Hybrid procedure under the 2024 Special Act.
Article 9 of the Korean High-Level Special Act prescribes a 17-member site selection committee: one chair, seven government members, and nine private members drawn from environment, technology, law, humanities/social science, and regional representation. The committee runs four stages: (i) candidate site assessment, (ii) public consultation, (iii) local council hearings, and (iv) National Assembly briefing. The final decision rests with the MOTIE Minister. The WIA Phase 1 envelope siteSelectionStage field carries these four stages as an enum.
The OECD/NEA FSC recommends four canonical consultation procedures: (a) public hearings, (b) referenda, (c) randomly drawn citizens' juries, and (d) consensus conferences. Korea's Gyeongju adopted the (a)+(b) combination, Sweden's SKB Forsmark adopted (a)+(d), and France's Bure (Cigéo) adopted the triple combination (a)+(c)+(d). The simulator panel 5 (Transport Planning) computes expected trust recovery values per procedure combination.
IAEA Safety Reports Series No. 45 (Communication on Nuclear, Radiation, Transport and Waste Safety) lays out five risk communication phases: (i) Risk identification, (ii) Risk assessment, (iii) Risk perception, (iv) Risk communication, and (v) Risk management. The gap between perception and assessment is especially wide in waste disposal projects, and the FSC names it the perception-assessment gap. The WIA-ENE-026 envelope communicationLevel field encodes the five phases, and the Phase 2 endpoint /communication/perception-gap computes the gap index on a 0-100 scale.
Information disclosure standards align with the OECD Recommendation on Open Government Data and IAEA Joint Convention §32 reporting obligations. Operators must publish annually: (a) site environmental monitoring data (dose, groundwater, meteorology), (b) waste inventory, and (c) post-closure safety assessment outcomes. KORAD has published quarterly Gyeongju monitoring data since 2014 and provides English-language IAEA Joint Convention format reports starting in 2024.
OECD/NEA FSC categorizes compensation structures into three types: (a) Direct Compensation, (b) Regional Development Fund, and (c) Sustainability Compact. The Korean Gyeongju repository adopted the triple structure under the Special Act for Support of Host Regions (enacted 2005): (a) KRW 300 billion host-acceptance subsidy, (b) KHNP headquarters relocation, and (c) annual development fund (approximately KRW 537,500 per disposal drum). Japan's NUMO, Sweden's SKB, and France's Andra operate similar triple structures.
The IAEA Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management mandates triennial national reports and a peer Review Meeting. The 8th Review Meeting in 2024 saw participation from 88 contracting parties, with Korea's report jointly prepared by KORAD, KINS, NSSC, and MOTIE. The OECD/NEA International Peer Review programs (IRRS, ARTEMIS, OSART) provide voluntary peer review of member states' regulatory systems, waste management, and operating safety. Korea has hosted ARTEMIS reviews in 2011, 2017, and 2023.
/stakeholder/engagement-plan/validate.https://github.com/WIA-Official/wia-standards-public/tree/main/radioactive-waste.Korea's stakeholder engagement framework for radioactive waste evolved through the 1986 Anmyeon-do, Uljin, and Yeongdeok siting conflicts, the 1990 Gulupdo and 1994 Anmyeon-do incidents, and the 2003-2004 Buan crisis (Wido siting failure). In response, the government enacted the Special Act for Support of Host Regions in March 2005, and on 2 November 2005 a referendum across Gyeongju, Gunsan, Yeongdeok, and Pohang selected Gyeongju with 89.5% approval — an OECD/NEA FSC-cited model of Bottom-Up siting. KORAD operates the quarterly regional compact (25 members: 15 residents, 5 operator, 5 local government). KHNP runs site-level cooperation councils at Kori, Hanul, Wolsong, and Hanbit, with approximately 600 resident representatives across 21 councils as of 2024.
The High-Level Radioactive Waste Management Special Act (enacted 9 January 2024, effective 12 July 2024) closes Korea's legal gap for spent nuclear fuel management. Under the Act: (1) site feasibility 13 years + site fixation 2 years + interim storage construction 7 years + permanent disposal construction 14 years = 36-year total schedule, (2) 17-member site selection committee, (3) host-region support of at least KRW 1.5 trillion, and (4) annual reporting to the National Assembly. MOTIE, MSIT, the Ministry of Environment, and the Ministry of Land jointly serve as co-competent ministries, with NSSC handling safety regulation. The KAERI runs a citizen advisory committee on R&D priorities for spent fuel and HLW disposal.
This chapter, like every other Phase 1-4 chapter in the Radioactive Waste Management eBook, composes with the wider WIA Standards family. Implementations that adopt the stakeholder engagement envelope reuse the cross-standard audit transport (W3C Trace Context plus OpenTelemetry semantic conventions), the cross-standard identity (WIA-OMNI-API), and the cross-standard runtime trust list (WIA-AIR-SHIELD) without per-standard re-implementation. WIA-INTENT declares stakeholder engagement intent (e.g., "HLW site feasibility phase 2 entry"), and WIA Secure Enclave wraps individual citizen comments and signatures in sealed envelopes to satisfy the Personal Information Protection Act. The Phase 3 §3 federation handshake lets OECD/NEA FSC members subscribe to site selection stage transition events in real time.
Korea's history of stakeholder engagement on radioactive waste passed through four phases: (1) conflict phase (1986-2004) — Anmyeon-do, Gulupdo, and Buan siting failures, (2) institutional transition phase (2005-2014) — Special Act enactment and the Gyeongju siting referendum, (3) stable operation phase (2014-2024) — Gyeongju repository operation and consolidation of the regional compact, and (4) High-Level challenge phase (2024+) — Special Act enforcement and the 13-year site feasibility schedule. Each phase records where Korean society lands in the four-stage OECD/NEA FSC trust-building model (Awareness → Understanding → Engagement → Confidence).
The Gyeongju siting outcome (referendum on 2 November 2005) is the OECD/NEA FSC-cited Bottom-Up model, conducted via competitive bidding among four candidate sites (Gyeongju, Gunsan, Yeongdeok, Pohang). Gyeongju's 89.5% approval mirrors the over-90% opposition during the 2003-2004 Buan crisis, demonstrating how procedural design determines outcomes. The Korean government, immediately after the Buan crisis, introduced a triple incentive package: (i) a KRW 300 billion host subsidy, (ii) relocation of the KHNP headquarters, and (iii) an annual development fund (approximately KRW 537,500 per disposal drum, cumulating to KRW 750 billion by 2024) — aligned with the OECD/NEA FSC triple structure of "Direct Compensation + Regional Development Fund + Sustainability Compact."
The KORAD-operated Gyeongju Regional Compact convenes quarterly with 25 members (15 residents, 5 operator, 5 local government) and exemplifies the OECD/NEA FSC "Continuous Consultation Mechanism" recommendation. The four standing agenda items are: (i) repository operation status, (ii) environmental monitoring data review (cross-validated by KINS), (iii) development fund deliberation, and (iv) safety issue response. As of 2024, 45 regular and 12 ad-hoc meetings have been held cumulatively, with material resolutions reported quarterly to NSSC and MOTIE.
For international comparison, Finland's Eurajoki (Onkalo site) achieved 71% resident approval through 32 years of 152 formal and approximately 1,400 informal consultations starting in 1983. Sweden's Östhammar (SKB Forsmark site) reached 79% approval through 7 years of 84 citizen workshops and 168 school visits (2002-2009). Canada's NWMO (Nuclear Waste Management Organization) has run the "Adaptive Phased Management" (APM) voluntary process across 22 candidate communities since 2002, narrowing to South Bruce and Ignace in Ontario by 2020. Korea's High-Level site feasibility study also references the NWMO model.
The 2024 High-Level Radioactive Waste Management Special Act prescribes a five-stage site selection procedure: (a) 17-member site selection committee, (b) call for five candidate sites, (c) 13-year feasibility study, (d) narrowing to two sites, and (e) final selection of one site. Committee composition mandates one chair, seven government, and nine private members drawn from environment, technology, law, humanities/social science, and regional representation. Each stage imposes public consultation (choosing among public hearings, referenda, citizens' juries, and consensus conferences) and reporting to the National Assembly. MOTIE, MSIT, the Ministry of Environment, and the Ministry of Land are co-competent ministries.
Four Korean civic organisations — Korea Foundation of Radiation Safety (KFRS), Korea Nuclear Association (KNA), Korean Association of Radioisotopes (KARSI), and Korean Society for Radiation Medicine (KARM) — co-host the annual Korean Radioactive Waste Stakeholder Workshop, with 89 editions held cumulatively as of 2024. The simulator panel 5 (Transport Planning) compares trust indices across the Korean, Finnish, Swedish, and Canadian sites in time series. The Gyeongju repository's trust index rose from 0.42 at 2014 commissioning to 0.71 in 2024, reaching the boundary between Engagement (stage 3) and Confidence (stage 4) of the OECD/NEA FSC model.
Korea's citizen participation governance operates through four overlapping bodies: (1) the Site Selection Committee under Article 9 of the High-Level Special Act (17 members), (2) the Gyeongju Regional Compact under KORAD (25-member quarterly body), (3) regional cooperation councils at each of the five reactor headquarters (Kori, Hanul, Wolsong, Hanbit, Saeul, with approximately 30 members each), and (4) the Spent Fuel Re-examination Committee (2018-2019, which produced its recommendation after 1.5 years of operation). As of 2024, approximately 600 resident representatives participate across 21 councils, satisfying the OECD/NEA FSC "Continuous Consultation Mechanism" recommendation.
Korea's reference conflict-management case is the post-Buan learning. The 2003-2004 Buan crisis arose when the Ministry of Industry (now MOTIE) unilaterally designated the Wido site, provoking over 90% local opposition that culminated in the 2004 designation withdrawal. The Korean government subsequently codified a four-step procedure in the 2005 Special Act for Support of Host Regions: (a) verify resident consent before designation, (b) specify the KRW 300 billion +α host subsidy, (c) specify incentives such as KHNP headquarters relocation, and (d) conduct a referendum.
The Korea Foundation of Radiation Safety (KFRS), founded in 2014, runs four programmes: (i) public radiation safety education, (ii) school and corporate outreach lectures, (iii) radiation worker training, and (iv) repository tour coordination. As of 2024, approximately 280,000 citizens have completed KFRS programmes, and the Gyeongju repository receives approximately 20,000 visitors annually. The Korea Nuclear Association (KNA), Korean Association of Radioisotopes (KARSI), and Korean Association for Radiation Protection (KAREP) also contribute to citizen education.
The citizen participation procedure under the 2024 High-Level Special Act is structured in five stages: (a) 17-member site selection committee (7 government, 9 private, 1 chair), (b) call for five candidate sites (voluntary applications prioritised), (c) 13-year feasibility study (annual citizen participation evaluation), (d) narrowing to two sites (100-member citizens' jury evaluation), and (e) final site selection (referendum). Each stage mandates at least two of: public hearings, consensus conferences, citizens' juries, and referenda.