why a merger project in the French authorities raises concerns

A year after the announcement by Emmanuel Macron of his plan to revive French nuclear power, the time has come for the first turmoil. Employees of the Institute for Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety (IRSN), an expert in all radiological risks, were called to strike on Monday 20 February. They protest against the announced disappearance of their institution, within the framework of a government project which would base its attributions and its employees in several other bodies, mainly the Nuclear Safety Authority (ASN).

This intention, unveiled to everyone’s surprise on February 8, could materialize at the end of the month. The bosses of the institutions involved had until Monday to give the government a “method of working” to complete this overhaul. But this project to change the monitoring of nuclear risks, welcomed by the boss of the ASN, worries some parliamentarians, experts and former IRSN. Franceinfo explains why.

Because it would put an end to the separation between experts and decision-makers

Today, the work of protecting against nuclear-related risks is shared between several actors. The Nuclear Safety Authority makes the decisions and monitors the installations linked to civil nuclear power. When it is necessary, for example, to decide whether or not to extend the life of a reactor, it is she who decides. It does so on the basis of scientific advice issued by a separate entity, the Institute for Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety. A model in force for more than twenty years and the creation of the IRSN, which the executive therefore wants to put an end to to get closer to what is done elsewhere, particularly in the United States.

The Ministry of Energy Transition explains that this decision was taken in early February, during the Nuclear Policy Council meeting around Emmanuel Macron to initiate a plan which notably provides for the construction of six EPRs. In this context, merging IRSN within several institutions, including ASN, should allow, according to the ministry, to “streamlining the technical review and decision-making processes” while strengthening “independence of control”.

Thierry Charles, former Deputy Director General of IRSN, explains to the Reporterre site that the current system “allows the expert to work freely on the basis of technical and scientific elements, since he is not subject to the weight of the decision to be taken later”. He is concerned that once integrated into the ASN, the opinions of the experts are forced to consider issues other than safety. Spokesperson for the négaWatt association, Yves Marignac believes in a text published on LinkedIn that “IThe intention is clearly (…) to remove the obstacle of safety requirements that are too high for the industry to meet.”

“The goal is not to speed up the procedures, but in a more compact structure, we can make it more fluid”, defended the president of the ASN, Bernard Doroszczuk, heard Thursday by the Parliamentary Office for the Evaluation of Scientific Choices (Opecst). Supporter of the reform, he defended the independence of the ASN, which according to him would continue to benefit the experts, by underlining that his institution had several times complicated the plans of the political decision-makers and EDF, leading for example “to delays in commissioning the EPR” of Flamanville.

Because it would complicate the links with researchers

The government’s plan does not include integrating all of IRSN’s skills into ASN. Part of its attributions would fall to the authority in charge of military nuclear, the DNSD, and another to the Commissariat for Atomic Energy and Alternative Energies (CEA), a scientific research body. However, the IRSN employs researchers to support its expertise. The inter-union fears that with a view to splitting activities between the ASN and the CEA, a distance will inevitably be created between the people responsible for issuing opinions and those who advance knowledge.

“It will weaken the expertise”, believes François Jeffroy, CFDT delegate, interviewed by franceinfo. Before parliamentarians on Thursday, IRSN Director General Jean-Christophe Niel warned that the separation would be “complex, because these activities are sometimes carried out by the same people”. In 2020, three ministers, including Elisabeth Borne, then in charge of Ecological Transition, assured the IRSN Board of Directors of their concern for “do not separate expertise and research missions” of the institution, in a letter published since by Mediapart.

However, the details of the future organization desired by the executive are not yet known. During an interview with the unions on Friday, the Minister for Energy Transition, Agnès Pannier-Runacher, assured that “the plan that was drawn up to now, with the ASN taking the expertise and the CEA the research, was not at all stopped”, reports a CGT delegate, Philippe Bourachot.

Because it would upset the system at the dawn of important deadlines

“Breaking a system that works for a system that we don’t know is often not the right solution”, warned Thierry Charles, the former deputy director general of IRSN, on Monday. The reform project wanted by the executive is part of a revival of the French nuclear industry, but it also amounts to destabilizing an important link. This while between the projects for new EPRs and mini-reactors, IRSN was called upon to study the corrosion problem which caused the shutdown of many reactors in 2022, the nuclear waste burial project in Bure ( Meuse) or the extension of the lifespan of power plants from 50 to 60 years. “Starting a nuclear program on a system in mutation, not yet stabilized, presents a risk in terms of safety“estimated before the parliamentarians, Thursday, the researcher Michaël Mangeon, former IRSN and specialist in the history of French nuclear safety.

In a motion adopted Thursday, the IRSN board of directors alerts the government “on the risk of departures of IRSN personnel that could lead to paralysis of the radiation protection and nuclear safety control system”. The Ministry of Energy Transition assures that the reform will preserve “working conditions and remuneration” employees. But that might not be enough to hold them back, as the institution “already difficult to attract, because salaries at the IRSN are 20 to 40% below [de ceux] private”according to Thierry Charles.

‘Cause it happens suddenly

If the integration of IRSN experts into ASN had already been suggested by the latter’s boss in 2020, the government’s announcement on February 8 was unexpected. During the hearings conducted by the Parliamentary Office for the Evaluation of Scientific Choices on Thursday, some elected officials expressed their surprise. “In the most nuclear country in the world, the security system has proven its effectiveness. Why question it?”asked the socialist senator Angèle Préville.

The executive’s method has earned him criticism. “How can we defend the idea that the decision has already been taken when none of the stakeholders or any legitimate body has been consulted?”, lamented Lionel Larqué, member of IRSN’s Research Orientation Council. In a column published by Liberation (article reserved for subscribers)Cédric Villani, former deputy of the majority and ex-president of Opecst, rose up against a reform “organized on a corner of the table in the secrecy of a small committee (…) without preparation by the slightest debate, mission, hearing or field visit”.

The project could be implemented very quickly, via an amendment to the nuclear acceleration bill. This has already been adopted in the Senate and will be examined by the National Assembly in March. The deputy Horizons Pierre Henriet, current president of Opecst, confirmed that the option was on the table, and the director general of the IRSN also affirmed it to the staff representatives, according to Philippe Bourachot, CGT delegate. The inter-union asked Agnès Pannier-Runacher on Friday a “diagnostic” prior to a possible reform, but above all counts “to ensure that this amendment is not incorporated into this law”. The Ministry of Energy Transition, for its part, assures AFP that it envisages a merger concluded within a year to a year and a half.