報告書番号

Y98011

タイトル（和文）

フランスのバックエンド政策について -1991年廃棄物法と最近の動向-

タイトル（英文）

On the Fuel Cycle Back-end Policy in France - 1991 Waste Law and Recent Developments -

概要 （図表や脚注は「報告書全文」に掲載しております）

燃料サイクルバックエンド政策決定を巡る最近の動向について、従来わが国と同様に使用済燃料再処理を中心とする戦略を採っていたフランスの状況を調査し、とくに基本的方向性を規定した1991年廃棄物法、同法に記された3つの重点分野と関連する最近の動きをまとめ、わが国政策決定への示唆を得る。これまで再処理戦略を採っていたフランスにおいて、直接処分へも道を開く方向転換を含む包括的な戦略検討が、議会主導の下で行われていることに日本としても注目せざるを得ない。今後の燃料サイクルバックエンド政策決定は、対症療法的な個別施策の提示と推進では不十分であり、炉型戦略を踏まえた燃料サイクル全体を俯瞰した総合戦略、とりわけ「柔軟性」と「回収可能性」を確保した戦略を提示することで、将来世代により大きな選択の幅を与えるとの考え方に収斂していくものと見られ、その考え方は日本においても参考にすべきである。

概要 （英文）

This report is to review the policy decision making process in the area of nuclear fuel cycle back-end practiced in France, and to examine implications to the Japanese situation. Based on the latest information acquired from literacy as well as interviews to relevant organizations and experts, the author picked up the following observations:1. The back-end policy making process in France goes back to the Radioactive Waste Law enacted in 1991. The law is unique in two senses: Firstly, while the French government has inclined to deal with the nuclear related issues by submitting “decr驀,” it has been rather rare to compile official laws that need to be approved by the Parliament. Secondly, the Parliament appeared to commit itself strongly to national decision making in the nuclear fuel cycle back-end by implementing a clear deadline for the final decision to be made by 2006. 2. The governmental change took place in France in 1997. Any new government tends to start with denial of what have been done by the predecessor, which causes significant delay. Concrete sets of policies of the new government is yet to be presented. 3. The 1991 law primarily formulated three areas as the highest priority of R&D towards decisions to be made in 2006; 1) reactor strategy, especially R&D on transmutation of minor actinides, 2) final disposal of high-level wastes, especially siting of underground laboratories, and 3) long-term storage of wastes. Authorities responsible for each area, namely CEA for 1) and 3) and ANDRA for 2), are called for necessary efforts of R&D.4. The Mandil-Vesseron study had been initiated in line with the reactor strategy analysis specified by the 1991 law. Although its final report was not published officially and the new government has almost omitted it, the study showed clearly the flexibility and potential of French nuclear industry to oversee a wide range of strategy options and capacity to conduct relevant R&D. 5. The French government made a decision on siting of an underground laboratory and a long-term storage research facility on December 9, 1998. Although details of facilities to be installed are yet to be worked out, steady promotion is expected towards the decision to be made in 2006. 6. The notion of “Very Long-term Storage” suddenly received a high priority in policy making and R&D. It is true on one hand that the concept might be the only option to be taken if a final repository of wastes cannot be developed. More notably, however, it may be chosen positively as a strategy capable to accommodate and be coordinated with technology R&D for more advanced waste treatments.

報告者

キーワード