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 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