Abstract from the minutes of the 6th meeting of the Environmental Committee of the Parliament of Lower Saxony during the 8th election period on October 17, 1977
(no verbatim protocol but a summary)
Head of Division, Dr. Stuhr, Minister of Economics of Lower Saxony, on the site selection of Gorleben:
... In 1976, the Government of the state of Lower Saxony convened a project group to establish criteria and principals for a preliminary site exploration of the state government independent from the investigations undertaken by the Federal Government or the industry so far. The project group consisted of representatives of the ministries of economics, of social affairs and of the interior as well as the ministry of agriculture and the state department of soil research and the state mining office. The project group conducted its investigations in four phases.
During the first phase, the group limited its activities to the following two considerations: The first consideration was that a salt dome should form an integral part of the concept of a disposal plant. The second consideration was whether it would be possible to make an area of 3 times 4 km available within a salt dome. 23 out of the 140 salt domes have thus been selected.
During the 2nd phase, the 23 sites were investigated by taking the following 5 disqualifying criteria into account: Situation of the area with a size of 3 times 4 km, depth of the salt dome (not more than 800 m underneath the earth's surface), size of the salt dome (the larger the better), residential estates at the area of 3 times 4 km, the existence of competing claims to make use of this area. 13 sites thus remained.
During the 3rd phase, these 13 sites were examined on the basis of more precise objectives and criteria:
The Conference of Ministers of the Interior recommended that preselected sites should be situated near power plants.
Together with the Federal Ministry of the Interior, objectives of regional planning and evaluation guidelines of the Federal Ministry of the Environment for the locations of nuclear power plants and nuclear energy plants were defined.
The following groups of criteria existed:
Safety and environment
Reactor safety and radiation protection
Density of populiation in the area of the salt dome and in the operating area of 3 times 4 km, the population density of the sector, the situation of the building ground, the risk of earthquakes, the amount of air traffic, the aspect of storing and transporting explosive substance, the risk of floods, the meteorological conditions and, last but not least, the radiological exposure already existing.
Geology of the final disposal site
Decisive group of criteria: Situation of the operating area above the salt dome (the higher this area would be in relation to the salt dome the better) and the depth of the salt dome (if possible, not deeper than 500 m).
Security of public drinking water supply
prohibitive, if water works or priviledged groundwater areas exist or are planned in the area of the salt dome, of the potential operating area or of the downstream groundwater flows.
Landscape conservation and recreation
prohibitive, if there are nature reserves, nature parks, natural monuments, recreation or tourist areas in the surroundings of the salt dome.
Economic aspects
Regional and national connection of the potential site
if possible, an optimum regional and national connection of the site (railway, motorways, waterways) should be given
Use of surface
Residential estates and ownership structure directly near the site
possible water supplies of an envisaged nuclear disposal centre:
Withdrawal of groundwater and surface water and remainder of salt solution from the caverns to be obtained by solution mining in the salt dome
Of the 13 sites, four remained following completion of phase 3: Wahn, Lichtenhorst, Gorleben and Mariaglück.
During the 4th phase of the project, these 4 locations were examined once again in an additional intensive discussion within the project group. Here, three of the chosen locations revealed at least one criterion which excluded them as potential repository. Gorleben was thus the only location proposed to the Government as being an optimal site. The Gorleben salt dome is one of the the largest salt domes existing in Lower Saxony. It has a size of approximately 40 square km. The salt can first be found at a depth of 300 m and reaches down to a depth of 3,500 m. In the area of the selected site, the salt dome has no damages. These were the criteria which were crucial in proposing this site to the Government of the state.
The prohibitive criteria of the other three sites were the following: Wahn is situated near or even within the area of a firing range of the German Federal Armed Forces. Lichtenhorst is situated near an area which is of utmost importance for the drinking water supply of the state capital of Hanover. In Mariaglück, there is a comparatively small salt dome which would not be suitable for a disposal centre project.
Tholke wanted to know whether these three sites have now dropped completely out of the race or whether any of them would be reconsidered in case Gorleben would not be suitable after all. To this question, Stuhr replied that of the Government of the state decided in favour of Gorleben within the pre-selection process. The aim of this pre-selection would be to enable the Federal Government and the industry to initiate a licensing procedure. He reported that he had mentioned the criteria inducing the exclusion of the three other sites. This clearly resulted in Gorleben being the only site at stake. Bruns enquired about the point of time Gorleben had been selected and proposed to the Government of state. Mr Stuhr replied that the study had been submitted to the industry in mid-1975 and that the Government of state convened the mentioned project group in May or June 1976. The project group held around twenty meetings and submitted a joint cabinet bill to the state government in late autumn 1976.
Hoch wanted to know who would now be in charge of it and whether scientific, geological, meteorogolical or safety-related aspects would be of top priority. The reply of Mr Stuhr revealed that the project group was lead-managed by the Minister of Economics. After the state government had preliminarily decided on the site, the lead management was transferred to the Social Minister to whom the applications of the DWK have been submitted in the meantime. ...