346 / 386
SOCIAL, ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIETAL RESPONSIBILITY
A3
2. Environmental information
Operations to clean up the Miramas site were finished on October 31, 2015.
Operating units such as the washing station and the unit to remove explosives
contamination are winding down, and the site is in the final clean-up phase. The
corresponding work completion reports were sent to the prefecture for review
and approval. The site is now working with local partners to examine its sale and
reindustrialization. No operations were conducted at the site in 2016, except for
the winding down of the UDT and the dismantling of the related building, which
are subject to a legal proceeding.
2.2.3.
CONSIDERATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL STRESS
AND CHRONIC HAZARDS
A nuclear facility’s environmental impact study is updated at each stage of its
lifecycle, i.e. upon its creation, modification, shutdown and dismantling. Such
studies seek to characterize the potential health effects and environmental impacts
of stresses and releases from the facility in question.
They include chemical hazards assessments which focus on the neighboring
population that might be chronically exposed to facility releases. They are carried out
based on normal facility operating scenarios, both in France and abroad, and factor
in different potential exposure paths to the neighboring populations in approaches
that are as realistic as possible. They are repeated at each material modification of
the facilities, based on the latest available scientific knowledge.
Environmental impact studies using risk assessment methods are also used to
prevent environmental hazards (protection of plant and animal life). These studies
are performed for each new facility and for each notable change in existing facilities.
For the latter, environmental monitoring regulations also include specific measures
to assess their impact on the environment, such as monitoring of radiological and/or
chemical markers in different environmental matrices, supplemented as necessary
by measures for eco-monitoring of plant and animal life. The Tricastin site, for
instance, added ecological monitoring measures to its environmental monitoring
program specific to local ecological issues (periodic inventories and standardized
ecological indices).
Concerning the asbestos risk, the group’s asbestos directive was revised in 2014
to factor in regulatory changes and operating experience from the sites, and was
deployed in 2015. Since September 2008, the carcinogenic, mutagenic and
reprotoxic substances directive (CMR) has applied to all sites where the Group is
the principal operator. Of the two sections in the directive, one deals with managing
workstation risk, while the other addresses environmental risk management. The
objectives of the directive include identifying and eliminating all class 1A and 1B
CMRs if it is technically and economically feasible to do so, and ensuring the
traceability of employee exposure through measurement and follow-up.
Prevention of Legionnaires’ disease is also a priority for the entities involved,
particularly as concerns domestic hot water systems.
Each site manages the prevention of more specific noise, olfactory, light and visual
pollution locally as a function of local issues (such as whether or not there are
residences close to the sites) and constraints, and regulatory requirements.
2.2.4.
TECHNOLOGICAL AND CHEMICAL HAZARDS
The French law of July 30, 2003 on the prevention of risks of technological and
natural origin and on compensation for damages, together with its implementing
regulations, introduced a new tool for controlling urban development around the
Group’s three “high threshold” Seveso sites in France: the defluorination facility at
the AREVA NC Tricastin site, the conversion facilities of AREVA NC Malvési and
Tricastin, and the AREVA NP Jarrie site. Called the Technological Risk Prevention
Plan (TRPP), the tool is used to reduce risks, deal with existing situations, plan for
the future and stimulate dialogue with stakeholders, including local governments.
In accordance with AREVA’s second environmental policy goal, the focus is on the
prevention and management of environmental hazards, particularly operational
risks, based on periodic updates to the hazards analyses for the industrial sites
(see Section 4.4.2.1.
Seveso regulations
).
2.3.
ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE
2.3.1.
SUSTAINABLE USE OF RESOURCES, LAND
AND RAW MATERIALS
Sustainable use of resources
To minimize its environmental footprint, the group acts to reduce withdrawals
from the natural environment and its consumption of materials and energy, and
continually searches for opportunities to recycle waste.
In the projects, AREVA’s eco-design approach contributed to the early identification
of the environmental impacts of major projects and thus to optimization efforts, in
particular as concerns projects in theMining, Chemistry/Enrichment and Recycling
Business Units, with support from the group’s engineering companies.
Concrete examples of projects contributing to the sustainable use of resources by
limiting the consumption of raw materials are presented in the following sections
on energy management at AREVA, on the reduction of water usage and on
management of the group’s waste.
Land use
AREVA’s industrial and mining operations use land. While the land use of its main
industrial operations remains practically unchanged throughout the Group, the land
use of its mining operations depends directly on themining technologies employed:
an underground mine requires little land compared with an open-pit mine, which
requires a larger land area. Roads and related supply systems to the facilities may
also influence land use. AREVA is aware of these issues and tries to minimize them.
In addition, it is important to include the operating cycle in land management
efforts. Rehabilitation at the end of operations will condition the return to a state of
equilibrium. In France, wheremining operations ceased nearly 15 years ago, AREVA
manages about 250 former mining sites representing some 14,000 hectares of land.
Former mines are reclaimed and replanted to limit the residual impacts and integrate
the sites into the natural landscape while restoring habitat for different species, in
harmony with the natural environment and in agreement with the local stakeholders.
An inventory of these sites shows that nearly half of the land occupied andmanaged
346
2016 AREVA
REFERENCE DOCUMENT