Andra s Responses to the Public Debate on the Cigeo Geological Repository Project

Andra s Responses to the Public Debate on the Cigeo Geological Repository Project

In accordance with Articles L.121-13 and R.121-11 of the Environmental Code, the Board of Administrators of Andra met May 5, 2014 to deliberate on the follow-up by Andra of the public debate on Cigéo project. The Board of Administrators of Andra wanted to highlight the richness of the debate, particularly the many expressions at the national and local levels, while regretting the inability to hold public meetings. He noted that the survey conducted in June 2013 by TNS- Sofres in Meuse / Haute-Marne for the National Public Debate Commission shows that "nine people in ten in two departments said they had heard of the proposed industrial center in Bure and this knowledge is not limited to a vague hearsay. Three-quarters of respondents say they know what it is. " the code of the environment and in particular Articles L.542-10-1, L. and R.121-1 and seq, the n 91-1381 law of 30 December 1991 concerning research on radioactive waste management, the opinion of the Nuclear Safety Authority of 1 February 2006 on "Research on the management of high-level and long-lived waste (HLW) conducted within the framework of the law of 30 December 1991, and links with the PNGDR-MV (National Plan of Radioactive Materials and Waste Management)", the overall evaluation report of January 2006 by the National Assessment Commission on the research conducted within the framework of the law of 30 December 1991, the Planning Act 2006-739 of 28 June 2006 on the sustainable management of radioactive materials and waste, the decree n 2007-1557 of 2 November 2007 on the basic nuclear installations and on the control, in terms of nuclear safety, of transport of radioactive substances, the European Directive 2011/70/Euratom of 19 July 2011 establishing a Community framework for the responsible and safe management of spent fuel and radioactive waste the publication in 2012 of the document "Reversibility of decisions and retrievability of radioactive waste " from the Agency for Nuclear Energy of the OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development) the referral by Andra of the National Commission for Public Debate on 9 October 2012, the decisions of the National Commission for Public Debate on November 7, 2012, December 5, 2012, February 6, 2 013,July 3, 2013 and September 4, 2013, the opinion of 25 March 2013 of the National Assessment Board on proposed Andra reversibility and on the sketch level description of Cigéo,

the 28 March 2013 report from the High Committee for Transparency and Information on Nuclear Safety prior to the public debate on the proposed Cigéo deep geological disposal of radioactive waste, the 2013-00159 opinion of 26 April 2013 from the Institute for Radiological Protection and Nuclear Safety on "the developments of Cigéo project at the "Jesq03" stage since Dossier 2009 ", the 2013-AV-0179 opinion of 16 May 2013 of the Nuclear Safety Authority on the documents produced by Andra since 2009 on the proposed disposal of radioactive waste in deep geological formations, the report of the fact-finding mission on the management of radioactive waste from the Sustainable Development Commission of the National Assembly on July 3, 2013, to the 2013- AV- 0187 opinion of 4 July 2013 of the Nuclear Safety Authority on the transmutation of long-lived radioactive elements, the 24 July 2013 framing of the Cigéo impact assessment by the Environmental Authority, the letter from the Nuclear Safety Authority sent to Andra November 18, 2013, on the "Project Cigéo - Sketch Jesq03 2012 ', the assessment report N 7 of the National Assessment Board published in November 2013, the 2013-1304 decree of 27 December 2013 laying down the requirements of the National Plan of Radioactive Materials and Waste Management, the 3 February 2014 opinion of the citizens' panel convened by the National Commission for Public Debate in the debate on the Cigéo project, the reporting and the overall summary of the public debate published Feb. 12, 2014. Regarding the advisability of disposal and of continuing studies and research Whereas Act No. 2006-739 of 28 June 2006 designates reversible geological disposal as the reference solution for the long-term management of waste which, for safety reasons, cannot be disposed of at surface or near-surface facilities, based on studies conducted in the three areas of research defined under Law No. 91-1381 of 30 December 1991and their assessment by the French Nuclear Safety Authority (ASN) and the National Assessment Board (CNE), and on the conclusions of the public debate of 2005/2006; Whereas geological disposal is the internationally recognised reference solution for highlevel waste and for intermediate-level long-lived waste;

Whereas certain stakeholders have made remarks concerning the advisability of the project and the acknowledgement of the public debate of 2005/2006; Whereas there are many expressions of public support for continuing studies of various radioactive waste management solutions; Has decided to continue the Cigeo geological repository project, in particular through its Meuse/Haute-Marne Underground Research Laboratory, and to follow the same progressive approach initiated by the Law of 1991, under the conditions set out herein; Points out that the construction licence for the Cigeo geological repository will only be issued by the French Government at the end of a consultation process defined by the Environmental Code; Indicates that studies and research on management operations complementary to the disposal system will be continued by Andra and waste producers with a view to optimising the management of radioactive waste and reducing both its toxicity and its volume. Regarding the flexibility of the Cigeo geological repository in terms of the waste inventory to be accommodated Whereas requests have been made to clarify the inventory to be taken into account in the design of the repository, especially regarding the management of spent fuel were it to be considered as waste; Points out that the Cigeo project concerns high-level waste and intermediate-level long-lived waste, the latter representing almost 90% of the volume of primary packages to be disposed of or 70 000 m3, of which more than 40 000 m3 have already been produced; Points out that although design studies make no provision for the disposal of spent fuel, Andra is designing the repository with enough flexibility to adapt to various energy policy scenarios and their impact on the type and volume of waste to be disposed of. The question of whether the repository will be used to handle spent fuel were it to be considered as waste is the subject of a research programme under the French National Radioactive Materials and Waste Management Plan, bearing in mind that the disposal of such materials would not commence before 2080 and would require a specific licence; Points out that Andra, EDF and Areva have submitted as part of the public debate a study to assess the impact of various energy path scenarios on radioactive waste production and on the Cigeo geological repository; Proposes that the French Government should define the scope of waste to be considered by Andra in preparing the construction licence application for the repository, in particular to clarify how the Cigeo waste inventory ties in with energy production scenarios.

Regarding disposal safety Whereas the conclusions of the public debate show that the public is concerned about the management of risks relating to radioactive waste disposal; Points out that the geological repository will not be licensed until Andra has provided the French Nuclear Safety Authority (ASN) and its technical support organisation, the Institute for Radiological Protection and Nuclear Safety (IRSN) with convincing evidence of the safety of the disposal solution; Points out that waste packages may only be disposed of at the Cigeo geological repository if they meet requirements defined by Andra in the acceptance specifications that are drawn up taking into account operating and long-term safety objectives; Points out that waste involving specific issues, such as bituminised waste and the fire hazard for example, are the focus of dedicated testing programmes. The Nuclear Safety Authority will only authorise the disposal of such waste when Andra has demonstrated its ability to manage the related risks; Has decided that Andra will submit to the Nuclear Safety Authority a safety options package for examination before submitting the construction licence application. This package will include descriptions of the main safety-related technical options and a preliminary version of waste package acceptance specifications. Regarding the progressive nature of the project Whereas the conclusions of the public debate stress the fact that some stakeholders find the project schedule far too tight and that the idea of a new project schedule providing for a pilot repository stage would be a significant improvement ; Points out that the studies and research work carried out by Andra since 1994 have demonstrated the feasibility of building a geological repository on the site surveyed in the Meuse/Haute-Marne area and that underground laboratory tests have been conducted over the past ten years to test the construction of underground structures in argillaceous rock; Has decided to provide at the start of the operation of the geological repository for an industrial pilot phase prior to routine operation in order to back up the underground laboratory tests and confirm the following points during actual operations and in the associated conditions: risk management under operating conditions, industrial equipment performance, possibility of removing waste packages from their disposal cells, possibility of monitoring repository structures, possibility of sealing disposal cells and drifts.

Based on a representative inventory of high level waste and intermediate-level long-lived waste to be disposed, this industrial pilot phase will begin with inactive tests, before proceeding to the emplacement of high-level waste and intermediate-level long-lived waste packages. Tests can be scheduled during the pilot phase to allow industrial testing of technical and economic optimization that can be implemented in routine operation. The transition to the routine operations will occur after the assessment by Andra of this pilot industrial phase; Proposes to set up a master plan for the operation of the Cigeo geological repository which, after consulting stakeholders and subject to Government approval, would constitute the specifications to be implemented by Andra. In particular, this plan would set out: 1. The different stages in the construction and development of the repository, subject to licensing. The master plan could, in particular, include the forecast schedule considered by Andra and waste producers for the disposal of each category of waste. It would define the conditions for triggering the various development phases of the repository, including the industrial pilot phase. 2. The industrial pilot phase test programme. 3. Flexible conditions considered for the future possible disposal of waste other than that provided for in the construction licence (e.g. spent fuels should they be considered as waste). 4. Projected phasing for the sealing of disposal cells and underground drifts, together with the expected deadline for the final closure of the Cigeo geological repository, which, under the Act of 28 June 2006, can only be decided by law. The Cigeo operational master plan may be reviewed at the end of the industrial pilot phase, based on operating experience feedback, progress in knowledge, changes in disposal requirements, and at least every ten years thereafter. Regarding reversibility and retrievability Whereas reversibility contributes to public confidence in deep geological disposal because it preserves freedom of choice for future generations; Whereas the conditions of reversibility should be fixed by Parliament; Whereas requests have been made to clarify reversibility conditions before the construction licence application for the repository is submitted; Whereas the purpose of the disposal is to be closed to guarantee long-term safety passively; Whereas the reflections and recommendations on reversibility and retrievability conducted internationally by the Nuclear Energy Agency; Whereas the recommendation of the Environmental Authority to present in the impact assessment alternative methods of operation and closure of the repository Proposes the following definitions of reversibility and retrievability:

Reversibility: ability to offer the next generation choices as to the long-term management of radioactive waste, including in particular sealing repository structures or retrieving waste packages; this can be ensured in particular by the progressive and flexible development of the disposal system; Retrievability: ability to retrieve waste packages disposed of in a deep geological formation; Advocates, in order to develop the application for authorization to create Cigéo, the following stepwise approach to meet the demand of reversibility: continue repository design studies with the objective of allowing the possibility, during the operation of a hundred years, to remove the waste packages disposed of, define decision points in the Cigeo operational master plan allowing repository structures to be sealed more or less gradually after the industrial pilot phase, perform retrievability and sealing tests during the industrial pilot phase, revise the Cigeo operational master plan in preparation for routine operation to acknowledge operating experience feedback from the industrial pilot phase; Has decided that Andra will submit to the Nuclear Safety Authority,before submitting the construction licence application, a package describing the main technical options that make it possible to retrieve from disposal a waste package. ----------------------------------------- Regarding project phasing Whereas the level of detail expected by the Nuclear Safety Authority for examining the construction licence application, since the publication of Decree No. 2007-1557 of 2 November 2007; Whereas preliminary design and basic design are to be completed in 2015 and 2017 respectively, according to the industrial design schedule; Whereas the license to construct Cigéo may only be issued after the enactment of a law establishing the conditions for reversibility; Recalls that the Planning Act of 28 June 2006 sets as targets for reversible disposal in deep geological formation the application for creation authorization in 2015 and, subject to this authorization, the operation of the Centre in 2025. Indicates that in 2015 Andra will submit a proposal for an operational master plan to the Government and a safety options package and a retrievability technical options package to the Nuclear Safety Authority with a view to the examination of the Cigeo construction licence application, including a pilot operating phase. Based on these items and the basic design package, and subject to the approval of the Act on reversibility conditions, Andra will consolidate its construction licence application at the end of 2017;

Subject to necessary approvals, proposes to adopt the following provisional timetable: from 2015, preparation of facilities at the local level (creation of an electrical substation, enhancement of certain roads, railway sidings on site, water supply...), 2020 start of construction of disposal, 2025 start of the operation with the pilot industrial phase. Regarding the memory of the repository Whereas the public has expressed concern for the ability to preserve memory over a period ranging from several hundred to several hundred thousand years ; Points out that the safety of the geological repository in the very long term must be guaranteed passively, without depending on human action, and even if the site is forgotten. For this reason, during design studies, various scenarios involving inadvertent human intrusion in the repository to gain access to potential underground resources are assessed to ensure that repository confinement capabilities remain intact; Decides, however, to seek to ensure that memory is preserved for as long as possible. To that end, Andra will continue its interdisciplinary research programme on memory keeping to ensure that the memory of the repository is passed on to future generations. Regarding costs and funding Whereas the National Public Debate Commission has requested that the public should be given information on costs and funding; Points out that the documents on project costs and funding available for consultation on the public debate website provide more information than is usually made available for projects subjected to public debate; Points out that to determine the cost of the Cigeo geological repository, Andra must assess all project-related expenditure for over a hundred years. This concerns, in particular, initial studies and investments (construction of surface facilities and the initial underground structures), then repository operating and development expenses (construction of new structures, personnel, maintenance, etc.), insurance, taxes and duties, discount rules not to be defined by Andra. Undertakes to provide the Government with a cost update in mid-2014, as requested, after taking into account the conclusions of the public debate and ongoing optimisation studies;

Points out that, in accordance with the Act of 28 June 2006, the cost assessment is finalised and made public by the Minister of Energy, based on the assessment put forward by Andra, and after receiving the opinion of the Nuclear Safety Authority and the observations of the waste producers (EDF, CEA, Areva) who will bear these costs. Regular cost updates are planned to take into account the results of Andra s studies. Reaffirms Andra is willing to optimize disposal costs without reducing the level of security and safety, which remains the top priority Regarding the transportation of radioactive waste packages Whereas the public and stakeholders have expressed a preference for transporting radioactive waste packages by rail and for a branch line leading directly to the Cigeo geological repository site; Whereas more information is requested regarding radioactive waste transportation; Points out that the transportation of radioactive waste to the geological repository is the responsibility of waste producers; Indicates that Areva, CEA and EDF have agreed with Andra to prepare a master plan for transporting radioactive waste to the geological repository before submitting the licence application, and to refer to the High Committee for Transparency and Information on Nuclear Safety on this basis; Has decided to continue studies for connecting a branch line from the geological repository site to the national railway network to allow waste packages to be carried to their destination by rail without transhipment. Regarding the local integration of the project Whereas local stakeholders (elected officials, communities, businesses, trade unions, professional organizations, associations...) have expressed many concerns for regional development, planning and preservation; Reaffirms its commitment in the development of its policy of social responsibility (CSR) to remain attentive to the the expectations of local stakeholders in the Meuse and Haute-Marne area, and to achieve this by ensuring that the design, construction and operation of the repository: - limit impacts on humans and the environment, and respect the local quality of life, - promote the development of economic activity and employment in the area and contribute to the improvement of the supply of services; Undertakes to assist the Government and local authorities in planning and preparing the

construction and commissioning of amenities for the repository and, in particular, to provide them with all the necessary technical data to this end; Undertakes to make an active contribution to any initiative to assess the socio-economic impact of the repository at the local level; Has decided to study an application to have the Cigeo project certified as a Grand chantier (Major Project). Regarding the involvement of civil society in the project Whereas the public has requested more information about the Cigeo project; Whereas requests have been made to promote the development of more interdisciplinary assessments and renewed governance; Has decided to identify areas of concern and to broaden the scope of information and promote exchange and consultation among Andra, experts and the public on the Cigeo project, its risks, impact, reversibility and local integration, in preparation for the submittal of the construction licence application; Has decided to consult local and national stakeholders in connection with the preparation and revisions of the Cigeo operational master plan; Has decided to consult the Local Information and Oversight Committee of the Meuse-Haute Marne Centre to define new exchange procedures that are better adapted to the current status of the industrial project and, in this respect, proposes to plan with the Committee exchanges on documents submitted by Andra to the Nuclear Safety Authority for examination; Proposes to complement the work of the High Committee for Transparency and Information on Nuclear Safety and the Working Group of the National Plan of Radioactive Materials and Waste Management, to contribute to the development of pluralistic expertise on managing radioactive waste, including active participation in the process "MA-HAVL dialogue" launched by the National Association of Local Information Commissions and Committees (ANCCLI), the Local Information and Oversight Committee of the Meuse-Haute Marne Centre and the Institute for Radiological Protection and Nuclear Safety (IRSN). Has decided to study ways of opening up the governance of the Perennial Observatory of the Environment to local stakeholders; Has decided to open up the governance of Andra to civil society by setting up an interdisciplinary committee tasked with illustrating how social issues are taken into account in the work of the Agency.