ASN Report 2018

• The effluents and waste generated by the operation of the plants The fission products and other transuranic elements resulting from reprocessing are concentrated, vitrified and packaged in standard vitrified waste packages (CSD-V). The pieces of metal cladding are compacted and packaged in compacted waste packages (CSD-C). These reprocessing operations also use chemical and mechanical processes, the operation of which generates gaseous and liquid effluents as well as solid waste. The gaseous effluents are given off mainly during fuel assembly shearing and during the dissolving operation. These gaseous effluents are processed by scrubbing in a gas treatment unit. Residual radioactive gases, in particular krypton and tritium, are checked before being released into the atmosphere. The liquid effluents are processed and generally recycled. After verification and in accordance with the discharge limits, certain radionuclides, such as iodine and tritium, are sent to the marine outfall pipe. The others are sent to on-site packaging units (solid glass or bitumen matrix). The solid waste is packaged on-site, either by compacting, or by encapsulation in cement, or by vitrification. The solid radioactive waste from the reprocessing of spent fuel assemblies from French reactors is, depending on its composition, either sent to the low – and intermediate – level, short-lived waste repository at Soulaines (see chapter 14) or stored on the Orano Cycle site at La Hague, pending a final disposal solution (in particular the CSD-V and CSD-C waste packages). In accordance with Article L. 542-2 of the Environment Code, radioactive waste from the reprocessing of spent fuels of foreign origin is shipped back to its owners. It is however impossible to physically separate the waste according to the fuel from which it comes. In order to guarantee fair distribution of the waste resulting from the reprocessing of the fuels from its various customers, the licensee proposed an accounting system to track items entering and leaving the La Hague plant. This system, called Exper, was approved by Order of the Minister responsible for Energy on 2 October 2008. 1.4  ̶  Fuel cycle consistency in terms of nuclear safety and radiation protection The “nuclear fuel cycle” comprises the fabrication of the nuclear fuel used in the nuclear power plant reactors, its storage and its reprocessing after irradiation. Several licensees are involved in the cycle: Orano Cycle, Framatome, EDF and Andra. ASN monitors the overall consistency of the industrial choices made with regard to fuel management and which could have consequences for safety. In this context, ASN periodically asks EDF to submit a “Cycle Impact” file prepared jointly with the fuel cycle stakeholders and presenting the consequences –for each step of the nuclear fuel cycle– of EDF’s strategy for use of the different types of fuel in its reactors. In 2015, ASN asked EDF to conduct an overall review of the “Cycle Impact” file by 2016. In June 2016, EDF submitted the “Cycle Impact 2016” file for the period 2016-2030: this file, which was produced in collaboration with Framatome, Orano Cycle and Andra, more particularly identifies the maximum thresholds (capacity saturations, maximum isotope content of fuel reached, etc.) foreseeable by 2040, on the basis of various energy mix evolution scenarios. This update comprises a number of innovations with respect to the previous approaches initiated in 1999 and 2006: ∙ ∙ the study period, which habitually covered ten years, was increased to fifteen years, in order to take account of the time actually observed in the nuclear industry to design and build any new facilities identified as being necessary for implementation of the strategy; ∙ ∙ radioactive substances transport contingencies were explicitly taken into account; ∙ ∙ nuclear reactor closures were studied for the period of time considered, in particular assuming stable electricity demand until 2025, to take account of the planning provisions included in the Energy Transition for Green Growth Act 2015-992 of 17 August 2015; ∙ ∙ the strategy for managing and storing spent fuels pending reprocessing or disposal was explained. After examination, ASN delivered its opinion on 18 October 2018, the main conclusions of which are as follows. ASN considers that the “Cycle Impact 2016” file provides a satisfactory presentation of the consequences of the various nuclear fuel cycle evolution scenarios on the nuclear facilities, transport operations and waste. However, the consequences of the unforeseen events which could affect the operation of the cycle need to be studied in greater depth. ASN underlines the need to anticipate any strategic change in the functioning of the fuel cycle by at least ten years so that it can be designed and carried out under controlled conditions of safety and radiation protection. It is a question, for example, of ensuring that - given the incompressible development times for industrial projects - the needs for new spent fuel storage facilities or for new transport packaging designs are addressed sufficiently early. For the coming decade, it would notably appear that to avoid reaching the maximum capacity of existing storage facilities too quickly (spent fuel pools at NPPs and at La Hague facilities), any reduction in output by reactors consuming MOX fuel must be accompanied by a reduction in that from reactors consuming fuel obtained from Enriched Natural Uranium (ENU), so that all ENU spent fuels are reprocessed. In the longer term, it will be necessary either to have new storage capacities that are significantly greater than the current and projected capacities, or to be able to use MOX fuel in reactors other than the 900 MWe reactors, which are the oldest. The time-frame required for the design and production of these options is about ten years. ASN therefore asks the industrial players to start examining these two options without delay. The Government is currently preparing the “Multi-annual Energy Plan” (MEP), which is updated every five years. The functioning of the nuclear fuel cycle could evolve according to the orientations thus defined. ASN therefore asks the industrial players to study the safety and radiation protection consequences of implementing the MEP on the nuclear fuel cycle and its consistency at each of its revisions. 1.5  ̶  Outlook: planned facilities and facilities to be shut down soon • New uranium storage facility project on the Tricastin site In February 2015, Orano Cycle informed ASN that it wanted to create a new BNI on the Tricastin site intended for storage of uranium-bearing materials resulting from fuel reprocessing. Orano Cycle undertook work to optimise the existing storage facilities on the site in order to push back their saturation date from 2019 to 2021 and in November 2017 submitted a creation authorisation application for new storage buildings. In 2018, ASN informed the Minister responsible for Nuclear Safety, that the content of the creation authorisation application was sufficient to enable its review to continue in 2019. 322  ASN report on the state of nuclear safety and radiation protection in France in 2018 11 – NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE INSTALLATIONS