Keep Us Strong WikiLeaks logo

Currently released so far... 51122 / 251,287

Articles

Browse latest releases

Browse by creation date

Browse by origin

A B C D F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W Y Z

Browse by tag

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

Browse by classification

Community resources

courage is contagious

Viewing cable 05PARIS5297, FRENCH GOVERNMENT QUIETLY PREPARES FOR 2006 NUCLEAR WASTE

If you are new to these pages, please read an introduction on the structure of a cable as well as how to discuss them with others. See also the FAQs

Understanding cables
Every cable message consists of three parts:
  • The top box shows each cables unique reference number, when and by whom it originally was sent, and what its initial classification was.
  • The middle box contains the header information that is associated with the cable. It includes information about the receiver(s) as well as a general subject.
  • The bottom box presents the body of the cable. The opening can contain a more specific subject, references to other cables (browse by origin to find them) or additional comment. This is followed by the main contents of the cable: a summary, a collection of specific topics and a comment section.
To understand the justification used for the classification of each cable, please use this WikiSource article as reference.

Discussing cables
If you find meaningful or important information in a cable, please link directly to its unique reference number. Linking to a specific paragraph in the body of a cable is also possible by copying the appropriate link (to be found at theparagraph symbol). Please mark messages for social networking services like Twitter with the hash tags #cablegate and a hash containing the reference ID e.g. #05PARIS5297.
Reference ID Created Released Classification Origin
05PARIS5297 2005-08-02 15:39 2011-08-24 00:00 UNCLASSIFIED Embassy Paris
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 04 PARIS 005297 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DOE FOR OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY, OFFICE OF NUCLEAR ENERGY (NE-1 
SJOHNSON, NE-80 KLAU) 
DOE ALSO FOR NNSA, OFFICE OF SCIENCE; OFFICE EUROPEAN AND ASIAN AFFAIRS 
DOE ALSO FOR OFFICE OF CIVILIAN RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT (OCRWM) 
STATE FOR EUR/WE; OES; STAS; NP; AND EB/ESC 
EPA FOR IA 
STATE PLS PASS NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION (NRC FOR COMMISSIONER) 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: ENRG TSPL TPHY KSCA FR KNUC
SUBJECT: FRENCH GOVERNMENT QUIETLY PREPARES FOR 2006 NUCLEAR WASTE 
DEBATE 
 
REF: Paris 2727 
 
FOR USG ONLY; NOT FOR INTERNET DISTRIBUTION. 
 
------- 
Summary 
------- 
 
1.  With little fanfare, French authorities are advancing France's 
waste management strategy on the political agenda.  On schedule, on 
June 30 the National Waste Management Agency (ANDRA) and the Atomic 
Energy Commission (CEA) submitted to the GOF a progress report on R&D 
in their respective fields: deep geological repositories for ANDRA; 
partitioning and transmutation, packaging and long term storage for 
CEA.  Also in June 2005, the National Scientific Evaluation Committee 
(CNE) released a summary report on the three options explored by France 
for high-level long-lived waste (HLLLW) disposal.  In early July, 
France's Nuclear Safety Authority (ASN) released on the ASN website for 
public consultation a preliminary version of the National Plan for 
Radioactive Waste Management and Recoverable Materials (NPRWM-RM). 
This plan will reportedly be appended to the radioactive waste 
management bill presented to Parliament in 2006, thus giving it a much 
larger scope than initially envisaged.  All reports are supportive of 
deep geological disposal.  End summary. 
 
---------------------- 
Background information 
---------------------- 
 
2. In 1991, France laid out a 15-year research program, known as the 
"Bataille Law," to explore three options ("lines") for HLLLW disposal: 
line 1 - partition and transmutation of high-level nuclear waste into 
low-level substances; line 2 - geological storage (development of at 
least two underground laboratories in different underground areas-clay 
and granite); and line 3 - waste packaging and effects of long-term 
surface or subsurface storage.  By 2006, the Parliament must decide 
which method(s) of disposal should be implemented. 
 
3.  In March 2005, the influential Parliamentary Office for the 
Evaluation of Science and Technology Options (OPECST) released a 
comprehensive scientific report on R&D progress achieved in France in 
the area of HLLLW (reftel).  The OPECST report affirmed the validity 
and complementarity of the three directions for research defined in the 
1991 law.  Its conclusions were notably based on preliminary results 
provided by ANDRA and CEA officials.  ANDRA and CEA submitted a 
synthesis report to the Industry and Research Ministers on June 30. 
 
--------------------------------------------- ----------- 
Reporting on Fourteen Years of Scientific Progress: Four 
Reports in a Row 
--------------------------------------------- ----------- 
 
--ANDRA REPORT 
-------------- 
 
4.  The ANDRA report on the feasibility of a repository for HLLLW in a 
deep geological formation (line 2 of the law) includes two parts: 
-- A feasibility-assessment report on clay formations, based notably on 
the work conducted on the site of the Meuse/Haute Marne Underground 
Laboratory (known as Bure), and in foreign research laboratories (see: 
http://www.andra.fr/publication/produit/D05A_ 266.pdf; in French); and 
 
-- a report on the advantages of storage in granite formations based on 
research conducted by ANDRA in partnership with foreign laboratories 
http://www.andra.fr/publication/produit/ D05G_267.pdf; in French). 
Note: The selection process of a granite candidate site in France was 
never completed for political reasons (election cycle/strong local 
opposition to deep underground storage). 
 
5.  The ANDRA report emphasizes the "excellent confinement properties 
of the argillite (clays)" and confirms the suitability of the Bure site 
for repository development.  ANDRA also details techniques developed to 
prevent the degradation of the waste packages in the long term and 
ensure reversibility of the disposal over 300 years. 
 
-- CEA REPORT: "A Whole Combination of Solutions" 
--------------------------------------------- ---- 
 
6.  The CEA report focuses on lines 1 and 3 of the law. Concerning 
research undertaken under line 1 of the law, the CEA underscores the 
"remarkable progress" made in the development of processes permitting 
the separation of minor actinides and certain fission products. It also 
states that the feasibility of americium transmutation has been 
established, notably in fast neutron reactors.  (Note: Americium is the 
greatest contributor to radio toxicity after plutonium.) 
 
7.  According to CEA officials, important knowledge has also been 
acquired in the field of long-term behavior of radioactive materials 
and their containment (line 3 of the law), which will be useful for 
both geological and surface storage.  Scientific work has already led 
to the reduction by one-third of the production of radioactive waste at 
the COGEMA La Hague facility and has made it possible to reduce the 
volume of long-lived intermediate level wastes (LLILW) by a factor of 
10.  While different packaging types have been investigated, CEA 
researchers claim that vitrification is the most reliable and are 
confident that vitrified waste packages could resist decomposition 
during several hundred thousand years.  As for long-term storage, 
technical solutions have been developed which demonstrate the 
possibility of placing the waste (spent fuel) in surface or subsurface 
storage installations for a period of 300 years, with the possibility 
to retrieve the waste, for treatment or final geological storage, at 
any time. 
 
8.  Comment: Difference of views between CEA and parliamentarians: The 
CEA concludes its report by raising the possibility of geological 
storage not only for HLLLW but also for LLILW (e.g. cladding hulls, end 
caps, waste from effluent treatment) and which, according to CEA, 
cannot be stored subsurface. The authors of the OPECST report, 
Parliamentarians Birraux and Bataille, had proposed long-term storage 
for LLILW.  Following the release of the CEA report in June, Birraux 
and Bataille insisted that the 1991 law refers (ONLY) to waste with the 
double specificity - long-life AND high activity (which excludes 
intermediate activity waste).  Note: HLLLW currently represents 1700 m3 
of vitrified waste -- 110 m3 produced annually. Including LLILW in 
geological storage would increase drastically the volume of waste to 
store (46,000 m3 at the present time).  End note. The question is far 
from being solved: CNE officials (see para 10) testified in Parliament 
on June 29, also expressed their view that LLILW should be stored in 
geological disposal.  End comment. 
 
9.  The CEA report (in French only) can be consulted on the following 
websites: http://www.cea.fr/fr/sciences/dossier_loi1991 /Synthese.pdf 
http://www.cea.fr/fr/sciences/dossier_loi1991 /fiche_cea_Axe1.pdf 
http://www.cea.fr/fr/sciences/dossier_loi1991 /fiche_cea_Axe3.pdf. 
 
-- CNE 2005 ASSESSMENT 
---------------------- 
 
10.  Also in June 2005 the CNE, the national panel overseeing French 
research waste management, released its eleventh evaluation concerning 
France's R&D on radioactive waste management.  The CNE evaluation, 
based on preliminary  reports by the two agencies, provides a summary 
of all the results achieved so far on lines 1, 2, and 3 of the 1991 
law. The detailed report, also including a summary and conclusions in 
English, can be consulted on the following website: 
http://lesrapports.ladocumentationfrancaise.f r/BRP/054000461/0000.pdf.) 
 
11.  CNE conclusions: Line 1/partitioning: The CNE confirms its 
previous assessment that French research has been innovative and that 
significant scientific progress has been made.  It notes, however, that 
(CEA) work on demonstrating advanced partitioning technical feasibility 
is late according to the schedule contained in the 1991 law and that 
only partial results will be available at the end of 2005.  The CNE 
concludes that advanced partitioning experiments should be continued 
after 2006 to gradually reach a demonstration of industrial-like 
feasibility. 
 
12.  Line 1/Transmutation: A "hope."  Transmutation still has a long 
way to go since the research now depends on equipment which is only at 
the concept stage, whether as part of the generation IV reactor systems 
or Accelerator Driven Systems (ADS).  CNE officials further add that 
"in 2006 there will be no decisive argument permitting scientific, 
technical, and industrial decisions on transmutation but only hopes in 
relation to these different concepts." 
 
13.  Line 2/Deep geological disposal: The CNE notes that "the 
advancement of line 2 research is well above the one in line 1."  It 
confirms its previous favorable assessment on research conducted on the 
Bure site: "the confinement qualities of the (...) argillite (clays) 
are supported by the last observations in situ, in the laboratory, and 
by the results obtained on the core samples taken in the geological 
layers at the Bure site. The results of the first experiments and 
measurements in the laboratory will be available end 2005 as planned." 
14.  Line 3/Waste conditioning: The CNE considers that "research in 
line 3 that leads to the development of primary industrial waste 
packages has taken this technology to maturity....  The short or long 
term behaviors of waste and spent fuel packages in various situations 
has been reasonably well established.... However, it is necessary to 
continue the research to consolidate certain results, particularly on 
the resistance of some glass materials and on the confinement 
possibilities offered by ceramics, in order to possess a wide selection 
of conditioning means to confine long-lived radionucleides on the long 
term." 
 
15.  Line 3/Long-term storage of primary waste packages: "Research 
conducted within line 3 of the law is not completed, except for the 
industrial storage of present reprocessing waste.  The current programs 
on storage and disposal containers must be continued. In order to go 
further than generic studies on long-term storage facilities, it would 
be suitable to select a potential storage site."  The CNE further 
emphasizes the burden of this type of storage upon future generations. 
 
-- ASN REPORT: Working Towards More Integrated Approach and Social 
Acceptance 
--------------------------------------------- ---------- 
 
16. Giving larger scope to the 2006 legislation: The debate on waste 
management will not be limited to HLLLW.  For two years, the Nuclear 
Safety Authority (ASN) has been working on other types of radioactive 
waste whose levels are much lower but volumes much more significant 
(see reftel and para 21).  The resulting document, the National Plan 
for Radioactive Waste Management and Recoverable Materials (NPRWM-RM), 
is a comprehensive summary of existing data and expertise in the field, 
and discusses a large range of issues related to waste management 
responsibility, funding, inventory problems, and the "necessary 
information" for the public.  The objective of the NPRWM-RM is to 
ensure the coherence of the French waste management scheme, whatever 
the nature of the radioactive waste and its producer, to look for 
management solutions for each category of waste, also taking into 
account the concerns of the public.  The last part of the report 
includes a series of recommendations that are likely to become part of 
the draft bill. (The ASN released on July 13 a preliminary version of 
NPRWM-RM for public consultation and comments on the ASN website 
(www.asn.gouv.fr/domaines/dechetsnuc/PNGDRMV. pdf.) 
 
---------------- 
Agenda Confirmed 
---------------- 
 
17.  At the request of the Industry and Research Ministries, the ANDRA 
and CEA reports will now be officially assessed by CNE and ASN, and 
reviewed by a panel of international experts under the aegis of the 
Nuclear Energy Agency of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and 
Development.  CNE will publish a global assessment report in January 
2006 before the completion of the draft bill and its discussion in 
Parliament (first semester 2006).  Prior to the parliamentary 
discussion, the GOF also confirmed the launch of a public debate 
(modalities unknown) for this fall. 
 
------- 
Comment 
------- 
 
18.  Avoiding the 'NIMEY' ('Not in My Election Year') phenomenon: 2006 
will be an important year for radioactive waste management in France. 
Fifteen years after the Bataille law, and even though Research Minister 
Francois Goulard and Industry Minister Francois Loos both acknowledge 
the need for "another ten years of research in the area," stakeholders 
and politicians across the political board feel the need to legislate 
on the issue well before the beginning of the 2007 presidential 
campaign.  The shared opinion is that the parliamentary debate should 
not be postponed until 2008, and not take place in 2007 to avoid being 
"hijacked" by political parties in the context of the elections. 
 
19.  According to EST contacts, it is unlikely that Parliament will 
explicitly give a green light to the construction of a repository at 
Bure in 2006.  However, considering ASN and CNE support, the Parliament 
could well give an agreement "in principle" to a geological disposal 
solution.  While the Industry Minister recently emphasized that no 
"administrative decision" would be taken in 2006, he nevertheless 
indirectly confirmed the OPECST proposed calendar, i.e. possible 
authorization to create a (reversible) deep geologic repository by 2015 
and implementation of geological storage by 2025. 
 
------------------------ 
French Waste: Statistics 
------------------------ 
 
20.  At end 2002, according to ANDRA (2004 Activity Report released 
June 2005) the total volume of waste present in France and placed under 
French supervision amounted to 929,000 m3, broken down as follows: 
 
High level waste: 0.2 percent 
Intermediary level/long lived: 4.6 percent 
Low level/long lived: 4.6 percent 
Very low level: 11.1 percent 
Low or intermediary level/short lived: 79.5 percent 
 
Origins of radioactive waste in 2020 (in volume): 
 
Nuclear power: 68.7 percent 
Research: 17.8 percent 
Defense: 10.6 percent 
Non-nuclear power industry: 2.9 percent 
 
STAPLETON