Clear and planned responsibilities

Mechanism

Clear and Planned Responsibilities

Approach

Oversight provisions

This RK&M preservation mechanism is about proactively planning the clear description and transparent

assignment of responsibilities for a disposal facility throughout its lifetime, including RK&M preservation.

The focus is on the possible changing or moving of responsibilities from the original responsible actors (the

implementing agency, the regulating agencies) to other competent actors after closure of the disposal

Definition/description

facility, or after the license termination of the disposal project.

Details of what these responsibilities comprise depend on the disposal facility under consideration, its

broader societal context and national regulation. They may generally be described as “managing, operating

and keeping oversight” over the facility before closure, and “managing and keeping oversight” over the

facility after closure. Responsibilities include the duty of providing and preserving information relevant to

the disposal facility (before and after closure) and caring for its passive safety after closure.

Clear and planned responsibilities serve the purpose of RK&M preservation in two ways. Firstly, through

assigning clear and transparent responsibilities for a disposal facility – including for RK&M preservation –

to one or more organisations, both in the pre-closure and in the post-closure phases, accountability is

established and maintained over time. This minimises the risk of RK&M losses through negligence. It also

enables public scrutiny, for society to “keep an eye” on the actual implementation of plans and decisions.

As societal oversight, this provides additional support to RK&M preservation. Secondly, it explicitly

How does this

addresses the finding that the risk of losing RK&M is very high when projects end and/or when

responsibilities are transferred to other bodies (NEA, 2014). Careful planning can limit potential losses of

mechanism contribute

RK&M by setting up a timely process of RK&M transfer whereby maximal RK&M preservation is in the

to RK&M preservation/

interest of both the original responsible organisation and its successor(s).

How can it be

This mechanism thus is an RK&M preservation mechanism in itself, but also an important support to

implemented?

other mechanisms, e.g. – depending on the chosen national RK&M preservation strategy – laying down

the responsibilities for the development and preservation of a SER and KIF, for post-closure monitoring,

for developing and implementing a marker, etc.

In order to avoid a responsibility vacuum and accompanying RK&M loss, it is advisable to establish a

regulatory and governmental framework relating to how responsibilities for managing the disposal

facility – including managing RK&M preservation – are assigned, clearly and transparently

communicated and transferred over time.

Does the mechanism mainly preserve information, records, knowledge, memory or awareness?

Information: X

Records: X

Knowledge: X

Memory: X

Awareness:

The uninterrupted responsibility for the proper functioning of the repository, including oversight, leads

to the preservation (and production) of information, records and knowledge. This mechanism thus

indirectly supports the preservation of information, records and knowledge and, in their wake, memory.

What is the level of detail addressed/provided by the mechanism?

Low level of detail:

High level of detail: X

This mechanism indirectly supports the preservation of detailed information and knowledge. Depending

on the disposal system, on national regulation and on societal demands, the sort of knowledge and the

required levels of detail that should be preserved to carry out the responsibility for the proper

Scope

functioning of the repository may evolve over time. Depending on the specific elaboration of

responsibilities for actual RK&M preservation, the focus will be on both awareness/basic information

(e.g. a marker) and on knowledge/detailed information (e.g. a SER).

What is the main geographical or administrative-political scope (development / implementation /

operation) of the mechanism? On which scale does the mechanism notably enable RK&M preservation?

Local: X

Regional: X

National: X

International:

Virtual:

The ultimate responsibility for the repository, including RK&M preservation and oversight, lies with the

state and the national government. Hence, the planning and assignment of these responsibilities to

organisations, potentially including the establishment of a regulatory and governmental framework, is a

national task which, according to subsidiarity, may involve regional and local actors. Local, regional and

international actors, public and private, can all contribute to developing and taking oversight and RK&M

preservation responsibilities and/or to verifying their implementation. The mechanism can thus enable

RK&M preservation on all levels involved.

Which timescale(s) is this mechanism mainly aimed at (target timescale)?

Long term:

Medium term: X

Short term: X

Very short term:

The planning of responsibilities in the RK&M preservation context addresses the short and medium term,

and aims to avoid a transition into the long term (i.e. loss of oversight). Planning, stipulating and designating

Timescales

responsibilities for oversight over a disposal facility and RK&M preservation related tasks urges attention and

reflection on these topics, and as such contributes also to the very short term.

Clear responsibilities for managing and keeping oversight over the facility after closure are necessary for a

successful transition phase from operational to closure and post-closure activities (i.e. a transition phase in

which no RK&M are lost). Clear responsibilities in the operational phase are necessary in view of the overall

RK&M preservation strategy, since developing and implementing many of the RK&M preservation

mechanisms (SER, monitoring, information dissemination activities, etc.) take place during this phase.

PRESERVATION OF RK&M ACROSS GENERATIONS: FINAL REPORT OF THE RK&M INITIATIVE, NEA No. 7421, © OECD 2019

157

Mechanism

Clear and Planned Responsibilities

Pre-operational: X

Operational: X

Pre-closure: X

Post-closure: X

For this mechanism, the implementation timescale refers to the question of when to do the planning

and assignment of responsibilities and of how to maintain a clear designation of responsibilities. The

planning of responsibilities for the short term (as explained in the previous field) needs to be

implemented in the pre-operational and operational phase, while the planning for the medium term

needs to be implemented in the late operational and pre-closure phase. Maintaining clear designation of

Timescales

responsibilities is relevant over all timescales, including the post-closure phase.

When should this mechanism be developed? This may or may not be equal to the implementation

timescale.

Done: X

Pre-operational: X

Operational: X

Pre-closure:

Post-closure:

Developing the planning of responsibilities to look after the repository and to preserve RK&M should be

done in the early disposal project development phase. One should not expect actors that were never

involved in RWM to suddenly take on wide responsibilities in this area. The efficacy of responsibilities

needs to be monitored over time and adjusted according to disposal project phases and the evolving

societal contexts.

Should the mechanism be implemented intentionally (e.g. time capsules) or is its emergence largely

unintentional (e.g. surface traces) or can it not be fully controlled (e.g. art work)?

Intentional: X

Unintentional:

Cannot be controlled:

Responsibilities need to be carefully prepared and intentionally planned. One should not expect actors

that were never involved in RWM to suddenly take on wide responsibilities in this area. Nevertheless,

there is also a level of uncontrollability with regard to who does what in the future.

Characteristics

Is the mechanism mainly tangible or intangible?

Tangible:

Intangible: X

The planning and implementation of responsibilities are intangible.

Does the mechanism mainly rely on mediated transmission or non-mediated transmission?

Mediated transmission: X

Non-mediated transmission:

Responsibilities need to be transferred from one generation to the next.

The ultimate responsibility for the repository, including RK&M preservation and oversight, lies with the

state and the national government. Hence, the planning and assignment of these responsibilities to

organisations, potentially including the establishment of a regulatory and governmental framework, is a

national task.

Clear and planned responsibilities should ensure that host communities will not be left “on their own”

after closure. This is not to say that local, regional and international actors, public and private, cannot

Actors

and should not contribute to developing and taking up oversight and RK&M preservation

responsibilities and/or to verifying their implementation. It depends on the agreements made, which

therefore should preferably be done in a participatory manner even though the responsibility lies with

the state. Subsidiarity needs to be discussed. And one should not expect actors that were never involved

in RWM to suddenly take on wide responsibilities in this area.

Sharing responsibilities for RK&M preservation among more than one actor and in more than one

location is recommended to support robustness and redundancy.

Planning, stipulating and designating clear responsibilities is a key condition for a functional systemic

strategy of RK&M preservation. It forces alertness and reflection on the topic of RK&M preservation and

Main

can aid societal awareness. Planning post-closure responsibilities in the operational phase helps to

strengths/benefits

master the shortto medium-term transition period, which is particularly vulnerable with respect to

RK&M loss. The regulatory efficacy and societal involvement and approval of this mechanism add to its

strength.

Loss of records and memory often takes place during transitions of responsibility between organisations.

Although the assignment of responsibilities would ideally be introduced in a legal manner, current

regulatory frameworks concern themselves primarily with the short term only. Responsibilities for who

does what after closure have not yet been formally discussed in many countries. Transfer of

responsibilities to other oversight bodies or agencies is usually covered at a basic level only.

Specific

The operational phase is long and dynamic. Ongoing attention is required to plan and maintain fair and

issues/challenges

functional responsibilities. Thereby, the need for clear responsibilities in the operational phase itself

should not be underestimated. While the “who” question of clear responsibilities may appear to be

decided, addressing the “what” question may reveal that tasks related to (the preparation of long-term)

RK&M preservation are yet to be defined.

The sustainable exercise of responsibilities and the availability of budgets in the future is dependent on

the continued willingness of society to keep oversight over the facility.

International

International RK&M dimensions of clear and planned responsibilities can be related to international

dimension

conventions, directives, guidelines and best practices.

158

PRESERVATION OF RK&M ACROSS GENERATIONS: FINAL REPORT OF THE RK&M INITIATIVE, NEA No. 7421, © OECD 2019