France
French “Cycle Impact” approach
Technical Meeting IAEA Integrated approaches to the back end of the fuel cycle
July, 17 th – 19 th 2018
Sophie Missirian Patrick Devin Jean-Michel Hoorelbeke Table of contents
1. French ”Cycle Impact” context 2. Instruction of the “Cycle Impact” file 3. Advisory Committee of experts
4. Scenarios studied in the “Cycle Impact” file
5. French fuel cycle 1. French Nuclear Power Plants fleet (EDF) 2. Front End in France: Conversion (Orano Malvési and Tricastin) and chemistry (Orano Tricastin) 3. Front End in France: Enrichment (Orano Tricastin) 4. Front End in France: Fuel manufacture (Framatome) 5. Back End: Reprocessing La Hague Plant (Orano Cycle) 6. Back End: MOX manufacture (Orano MELOX) 7. Logistics in France: logistics services (Orano TNI) 8. Waste management: CSA disposal and CIGEO project (Andra) 6. Conclusion
French “Cycle Impact” approach 2 French ”Cycle Impact” context
• Initiative from the French Nuclear Safety Authority’s (ASN)
• Actors: EDF, in collaboration with its industrial French partners Orano (ex AREVA) and Andra
• Objectives: • Demonstrate that the choices made by industrial stakeholders do not create unacceptable consequences regarding the entire French fuel cycle in the mid-term • Give ASN an overview of future regulatory requests to be examined
• Scope of the study: NPPs, front-end and back-end facilities, interim storage and logistics in France
2000 file 2007 file 2016 file
- Time frame: - Time frame: - Time frame: 2015- 2000-2010 period 2007-2017 period 2030 and forecasts - Focus on fuel - Focus on fuel until 2040 management management - Broader scope: impact on fuel impacts on fuel hazard analysis, fuel cycle operations cycle facilities, from non-PWR NPPs and waste reactors management French “Cycle Impact” approach 3 Instruction of the 2016 “Cycle Impact” file
11/2016: request of the ASN 2016-2018: 1 year and half 06/2016: “Cycle Impact” file that the French technical of instruction for ~100 delivered to ASN support organization (IRSN) questions to the industrial assess the file stakeholders
05/2018: expert report from By the end of the year 2018, 06/2018: IRSN subjected to a peer letter to be sent by ASN with Opinion of the GP on the review by the Advisory actions to be performed by “Cycle Impact” file 2016 Committee of experts (GP) the industrial stakeholders for laboratories and plants
French “Cycle Impact” approach 4 Advisory Committee of experts
The Advisory Committee of experts of laboratories and plants is composed of 32 members :
• Experts of the field
• Including experts from waste, nuclear reactors and transports advisory committees
• Including NGOs
• Appointed by ASN for 4 years
French “Cycle Impact” approach 5 Scenarios studied in the “Cycle Impact” file
2 scenarios were studied: French recycling strategy and low variation of NPP fleet
Two additional variations with decreasing nuclear production were also studied.
These scenarios led to forecast:
1. The fresh fuel to manufacture and to transport,
2. The spent fuel to discharge, to transport, to storage in pools and to reprocess,
3. The reusable materials from reprocessing to transport, to recycle, to transform and to storage,
4. The waste management to transport, to storage and to dispose.
French “Cycle Impact” approach 6 French fuel cycle
French “Cycle Impact” approach 7 French Nuclear Power Plants fleet
58 NPPs in operation for 63 GWe 3 different types of fuels and 5 different fuel managements Hypothesis for nuclear production: 420 TWh/year
25
20 24
15 20
10
5 6 4 4 0 NPP power PWR 900 MW PWR 900 MW PWR 900 MW PWR 1300 MW PWR 1450 MW (EPR in construction) ENU ERU MOX ENU ENU Number of NPP per site NPP NPPs NPPs NPPs
French “Cycle Impact” approach 8 Front end in France Conversion Chemistry
Malvési, ComurheX II plant Tricastin, ComurheX II plant Tricastin TU5 Purification and Transformation Interim Transformation Transformation NU from Yellow cake La Hague T5 storage from UF4 to UF6 (uranium concentrated) to UF4 NU to Reprocessing Tricastin U 3O8 stable
GB II Tricastin W Interim UF6 Transformation UF6 storage Depleted todepleted Tricastin (tail) U 3O 8 stable or Bessines
Malvési site Reactor with flames CX II
Questions during instruction were about transports, ramp up CXII facility, uranium interim storage capacity
=> No identified difficulty for French Nuclear Cycle even when taking into account Orano’s foreign customers
French “Cycle Impact” approach 9 Front end in France Enrichment GB II enrichment plant
Gaseous diffusion until 2013 GB II
GBII centrifugation facility put in production progressively between 2010-2016
With 7.5 M SWU (Separated Work Unit) production by year
Enrichment natural uranium: U5 from 0,7% to 3 to 5 %
Questions during instruction were about transports, uranium interim storage capacity
=> No identified difficulty for French Nuclear Cycle even when taking into account Orano’s foreign customer
48Y Cylinders
French “Cycle Impact” approach 10 Front end in France Fuel Manufacture
Conversion UF6 to UO2 and manufacturing UOX fuel assembly
Questions during instruction were about transports, possibility to manufacture ERU (Enriched Reprocessing Uranium) and decontamination of UF6 cylinders associated
=> No difficulty was identified
Framatome Romans site
French “Cycle Impact” approach 11 Back End Reprocessing La Hague Plant
Metallic structure Fission Plutonium 1% Uranium 95% products 4% Questions during instruction were about external and on-site internal transports, spent fuel pools level of occupancy, waste interim storage management pending implementation CIGEO project, Operation issues, for instance what is the consequences if a factory was stopped ?
=> No difficulty was identified
French “Cycle Impact” approach 12 Back End MELOX
MELOX plant manufacture MOX Fuel to recycle Pu
Questions during instruction were about MELOX Process transport, the evolution of the Pu isotopic and the consequences for operation and particularly for Radiation Protection, scrap management
=> No difficulty was identified
Box with gloves French “Cycle Impact” approach 13 MX8 Packaging Logistics in France Fresh MOX Logistics services TN12/2 Packaging FS47 Packaging Spent Fuel PuO 2 For each material, there is a specific packaging FCC3 Packaging Fresh Fuel which is approved by ASN.
Questions during instruction were about the
anticipation of the renewal of approval, the rate of TN112 Packaging availability of packaging according to the transport Spent MOX flows and according to the packaging fleet.
=> No difficulty was identified DV 70 Packaging Depleted Uranium
TN GEMINI™ Packaging Alpha Waste
30B Cylinder 30B in a HERMES-MERCURE on-site internal Petrol Cask shell COG-OP-30B 48Y Cylinder transport For CSD-C Yellow Cake UF6 NAVETTE Packaging on-site internal UF6 transport for CSD-V
14 LR65 Tank NU French “Cycle Impact” approach Tank UF 4 Waste Management CSA Centre de stockage de l’Aube (LLW disposal)
• Total capacity: 1,000,000m 3; • 316,000m 3 emplaced between 1992 and 2016; • A wide range of types of waste packages can be accommodated; • Mass Activity Limits are defined per waste package and per disposal cell consistently with Safety Case; • 750TBq max for alpha emitters; • Annual consumption of radiological capacity and volume are carefully monitored.
French “Cycle Impact” approach 15 Waste Management Cigéo Project (HLW + ILW geological disposal) Meuse/Haute-Marne URL
• Clay layer investigated in Meuse/Haute-Marne URL allowing high containment in the very long term; • Reference inventory: around 10,000m 3 vitrified HLW; around 70,000m 3 ILW • Reversibility: Incremental development; Adaptability to potential policy changes (direct disposal of some SF…) ; Retrievability; Participation in decision making etc. • Public Debate 2013/2014; Application scheduled 2019 2030 • Operation will start with a Pilot Industrial Phase Closure… 2150
HLW 2050
ILW
2080 1km Shafts Access Ramps HLW Disposal Area ILW Disposal Area French “Cycle Impact” approach 16 U/G -500m Facilities Conclusion
• This exercise:
Is an opportunity to: Has however some limits:
Create a global vision of the French fuel cycle challenges in a Time frame: scenarios hypotheses defined in 2015 for a collaborative framework of the actors of the fuel cycle, IRSN presentation in GP in 2018 and ASN Consolidate an overview of the future French cycle taking into Some redundancies with other French regulatory exercises account past experience and identify constraints/requirements (PNGMDR…) and potential bottlenecks Collect the opinion of an expert group on this exercise which can be used by ASN to give its position
Facilitate communication between reactor operators, fuel cycle actors, regulators, waste management organization
• Next steps following this “Impact Cycle” file: • Six-monthly meetings with ASN to follow the commitments and actions of the industrial stakeholders • The preparation of the next exercise: scope, time frame, scenarios hypotheses in relation with the energy policy
French “Cycle Impact” approach 17