FRANCE'S YUCCA MOUNTAIN

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 04 PARIS 005300

SIPDIS

SENSITIVE

DOE FOR OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY
DOE ALSO FOR NNSA, OFFICE OF SCIENCE; OFFICE
EUROPEAN AND ASIAN AFFAIRS, AND 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

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: ENRG TSPL TPHY KSCA FR KNUC
SUBJECT: FRANCE'S YUCCA MOUNTAIN

REF: (A) PARIS 5297
(B) PARIS 2727

FOR USG ONLY; NOT FOR INTERNET DISTRIBUTION.

--------------
Summary
--------------


1. (U) On July 26, 2005, in the context of
the upcoming national debate and the 2006
law on nuclear waste of high-level, long-
lived radioactive waste (HLLLW) (see
reftels),EST Counselor, Science Affairs
Specialist, and EST Intern, met officials of
the French National Radioactive Waste
Management Agency (ANDRA) during a visit to
the Aube waste disposal facility and the
underground research laboratory in Bure,
Meuse/Haute Marne, near the French border
with Luxembourg. Essentially, the latter
facility is 'France's Yucca Mountain.' In
addition to the technical aspects of the day-
to-day management of both sites, EST Staff
discussed the issue of public acceptance of
the facilities as well as the future of
HLLLW underground disposal in France. After
a period of experiments at the Bure site, it
will soon be time for France to make a
decision at the national level regarding
deep geologic storage. With the political
intricacies of nuclear energy issues and the
recent nomination of Francois-Michel Gonnot
as ANDRA president, a member of parliament
experienced in negotiation and political
decision-making, the elements are in place
for a passionate debate and action with
consequences for years to come. End summary.

--------------
Background: The Meuse/Haute-Marne Facilities
--------------


2. (U) Each year, France generates 2.2
lbs/person of nuclear waste, 10 percent of
which is HLLLW. ANDRA has a dual mission:
management for the short-lived nuclear waste
and research for the nuclear waste that
cannot be handled by existing facilities,
namely HLLLW. The two sites visited provide
a glimpse into both missions of ANDRA.


3. (U) The above-ground Aube site is
designed to receive low and medium-level
radioactive waste for storage. Containers
of compressed nuclear waste embedded in
concrete are processed every day at the
site. As of today, 73 monumental concrete
coffins, each containing 77,700 cubic feet
of waste containers, have been filled and
sealed. Management of the facility and
monitoring its environmental impact are top
priorities for ANDRA officials. As an
independent government agency subject to
strict regulation, ANDRA regulates demand
and adapts prices for the waste-producing
entities (Electricite de France, AREVA, and
the Atomic Energy Commission) that also
finance its activities. Preservation is
another issue ANDRA takes into account, as
the site is meant to blend in with the
natural environment for hundreds of years
after its closure.


4. (U) The Bure site was created in
response to the 1991 law on management of
radioactive waste (see reftels). It was
designed to host deep underground research
facilities to test the containment
properties of the Callovo-Oxfordian
argillite (a type of dense clay formed over
geological time) located more than 1500 ft
underground. After slow progress in 2000-
2003, the laboratory now operates at full
capacity. Part of the progress observed on
the site is due to the opportunity the
researchers had to test the argillite
material in the Mount Terri Laboratory,
Switzerland. Moreover, the results and data
produced in Bure are instantly
electronically shared with members of a
European research team. Thus far, the Bure
scientists have been able to answer
positively each of the questions posed
regarding safety, feasibility and
reversibility of deep geologic storage of
high level radioactive waste at the site.

--------------
Public Acceptance: Highest Constant Priority
--------------


5. (U) Information and discussion with the
public is a major part of ANDRA's mission.
Although the two sites are located in low-
population and low industrial activity
areas, the storage site and laboratory
attract intense questioning from the general
public as well as local and foreign
officials. Safety concerns and questions
about the site have fostered close
coordination between ANDRA and the
neighboring populations. Presciently, the
modern information centers which contain
extensive literature, interactive
exhibitions and auditoriums for
presentations, were built before the actual
industrial or research facilities.


6. (SBU) Whereas the Aube site appears to
have come to terms with the local
population, the Bure laboratory still faces
significant opposition. Part of the reason
for this is the difference in level of
potential 'dangerousness' between the
nuclear wastes that are or could be
processed on the sites. Although no nuclear
material is yet present at Bure, and despite
the fact that ANDRA is the largest employer
in the region, officials anticipate tougher
criticism as the project of building an
underground disposal facility gains
momentum.


7. (SBU) ANDRA officials identified four
types of opposition within the local
population:

-- Traditional "NIMBY-like" movements, to
whom ANDRA points out the economic
advantages and the overall safety of the
Bure site. (ANDRA officials called the
movement by the French words "Pas chez
nous!")

-- "Anti" movements, a vocal group in
France, that opposes Bure as well as nuclear
energy, globalization, GMOs, and low quality
standards for food. ANDRA finds
rationalizing with the "anti everything"
group very difficult.

-- "Anti-nuclear opposition" is another
specific group. ANDRA responds to it by
saying it neither supports nor rejects
nuclear energy and the energy policy of the
government. Its responsibility is to address
the given problem of nuclear waste, by
searching for acceptable solutions. ANDRA
also reaffirms to this group the scientific
nature of the laboratory, not designed to
receive nuclear waste.
-- "Skeptic" movements. ANDRA focuses its
outreach activity on this group who are
concerned about the consequences of deep
underground disposal. By making its results
and activity available to the population,
ANDRA hopes to gain support for a deep
geological storage facility in the future.


8. (U) Publication of information
(newsletters, magazines) and tours are two
of the main outreach activities led by ANDRA
in Meuse/Haute Marne. ANDRA has also
established a significant sponsorship
program, as one of its objectives is to
support science, research, environmental and
cultural heritage protection initiatives. In
2003, for example, 41 sponsorship programs
were established for a total amount of
37,000 euros. ANDRA has also agreed to pay
for a supporting fund aimed at financing
public facilities for the surrounding
"communes"(villages). Although these
activities can sometimes be denounced as
"propaganda," officials assert that they
contribute to public acceptance.


9. (SBU) The Bure site will be central to
the public debate organized by the National
Public Debate Commission (CNDP,
www.debatpublic.com),in charge of
organizing public consultations about major
projects for national and regional
development. In addition, some local
officials have called for the launching of a
petition asking for a local referendum about
the underground storage facility project.
One ANDRA escort said that the petition
currently had more than twenty-thousand
names on it. He was very aware of the
negative correlation between those who sign
a petition and a proposed underlying project
(in this case the deep underground storage
facility).

--------------
The Future of Bure: Politics, Money, and
Uncertainties
--------------


10. (SBU) ANDRA sees 2006 as its most
crucial year. After publishing a final
report in June, the French National Assembly
will study the future of nuclear waste
management and, accordingly, the future of
the Bure facilities. Chances are that the
concept of deep underground storage will be
accepted, but the current Bure facilities
will in no way become the actual storage
site. In case a storage facility is built on
the model proposed by ANDRA, it will more
likely be located in the same geologic
deposit within some kilometers of the
laboratory. The laboratory will retain its
scientific purpose, as tests for the future
storage systems will still be required.


11. (SBU) Financial issues will be at the
core of the decision made by public
authorities addressing deep geologic storage
for long-lived highly radioactive waste. The
first uncertainty that will have to be
addressed is the funding of the future
underground storage facility. For now, based
on the 'polluter-payer' principle, waste
producing companies provide most of the
funding for ANDRA's activities. This same
principle may be more difficult to apply for
facilities that will be built in the decades
to come, and for which no bottom line can be
drawn. Companies are unlikely to commit
themselves on such an unclear basis;
consequently, lawmakers will have to come up
with a solution in the upcoming legislation.


12. (SBU) The cost of storage will depend
on the time decision-makers are willing to
wait before transferring radioactive waste
underground. This uncertainty is linked to
the declining temperature of HLLLW. High
temperatures can alter the properties of the
rock in which waste is buried. Callovo-
oxfordian argillites are particularly
sensitive to a change of temperature, which
could be amplified if waste packages are
disposed close to one another. In sum, if
HLLLWs are disposed when still hot, packages
will have to be placed far from one another,
hence increasing the length and the cost of
the galleries. If decision makers are
willing to wait, HLLLWs can be placed closer
to one another. The differences in cost can
be enormous. One ANDRA official told
Embassy representatives the difference
between disposing "cold" or "hot" nuclear
waste would be in the range of thirty
billion Euros.


13. (SBU) The new chairman of ANDRA,
Francois-Michel Gonnot, was appointed on May
31 as the head of ANDRA. A graduate of the
French School of Political Sciences
(Sciences Po),Gonnot is a former journalist
and a member of Parliament representing the
Oise department. He is a local politician
who chaired the National Assembly Commission
on Production and Trade and is a specialist
on energy questions. His impact on the
future debate on waste management is much
awaited. However, by all accounts, he was
chosen because of his substantial political
experience, which will be critical during
the months ahead in the charged debate (pun
not intended) as the nuclear waste issue
winds through the public, government, and
Parliament.

14 (SBU) COMMENT: What struck EST staff in
their visit to Bure was the sense that ANDRA
officials and scientists had located a
superb site for long-lived highly
radioactive waste. Their continued
experiments only confirm the results of
previous ones highlighting the excellent
confinement characteristics of the clay
deposits. The science appears to be less
for the benefit of understanding the
characteristics of the site than for
reassuring a skeptical local public. END
COMMENT.

STAPLETON