Newsletter produced by ANDRA, the French National Radioactive Waste Management Agency.

This document is the technical overview of the SAFIR 2 report that synthesises all of the technical and scientific knowledge available at the end of the second phase (1990–2000) of the ONDRAF/NIRAS programme of methodological research and development on the final disposal of category B and C waste in a poorly-indurated clay formation. The SAFIR 2 report will be handed over by ONDRAF/NIRAS to its supervisory Minister at the beginning of 2002, after publication approval by its Board of Directors.

The thick and regionally extensive sequence of shales and associated clastic sedimentary rocks of Late Devonian and Early Mississippian age has been considered among the “nonsalt geologies” for deep subsurface containment of high-level radioactive wastes.

Thorough long-term studies have shown that the Finnish bedrock is suitable for the permanent isolation of spent nuclear fuel from organic nature. Legislation requires that besides safety, an assessment be made of any other environmental impacts of the final disposal facility. Environmental impact assessment (EIA) in respect of the final disposal facility for spent nuclear fuel got under way in 1997 when Posiva Oy, which is responsible for the project, began work on an EIA programme.

Nuclear waste disposal in the USA is a difficult policy issue infused with science, technology, and politics. This issue provides an example of the co-production of scientific knowledge and politics through public policy. The proponents of a repository site at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, argue that their decision to go ahead with the site is based on ‘sound science’, but the science they use to uphold their decision is influenced by politics. In turn, the politics of site selection has been altered by the scientific knowledge produced.

Main events Licensing process proceeds according to plan Posiva aims to submit the construction license application in 2012. In 2011, research and analysis work continued to ensure the timely availability of results and related reports. The feedback provided by the Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority and other authorities for the preliminary licensing documentation submitted in 2009 was systematically reviewed in 2011, and steps were taken to ensure it is taken into account during the license submission phase.