2013-02

,

2013. 9

KPS

| | | | |

| |

- I -

1

5 1. 5

2. , 8

3. 11

4. 11

5. 15

6. 16

1 21

1 21

2 22

1. 22

2. 29

3. 33

4. 40

5. 47

3 50

1. 50

2. 55

3. 2012 56

4 : 77

80

81

- II -

2 , 83

1 83

2 85

1. 85

2. 87

3. 90

3 94

1. 94

2. 96

3. 97

4 , 103

1. 103

2. 104

3. 109

5 : 113

115

3 117

1 117

2 117

3 120

1. (1950~1970 ) 120

2. (1970 ~1990 ) 122

3. JCO (1990 ~) 123

4 124

5 : 128

- III -

129

4 130

1 130

1. 130

2. : 132

3. 141

2 148

1. 148

2. 151

3 201

4 206

5 212

218

KPS 221

5 227

1 227

1. 228

2. ( ) 229

2 237

1. , 237

2. 242

3 254 1. 254

2. 259 264

- IV -

6 265

1 265

1. 265

2. 268

2 269 1. 271 2. MB 275 3. , 2793 282 1. 282 2. KPS: 285 3. : 293 4. : 303 5. : 3134 317 1. 317 2. , 324

5 :

337 1. 338

2. 340

3. 342

345

- V -

[ 1-1] 32

[ 1-2] 1 (2012.4.22) 61

[ 1-3] 2 (2012.5.6) 61

[ 2-1] 95

[ 3-1] 121

[ 4-1] 137

[ 4-2] IAEA 139

[ 4-3] Hanford Site 143

[ 4-4] 148

[ 4-5] 149

[ 4-6] 154

[ 4-7] ( ) 154

[ 4-8] 155

[ 4-9] ( ) 155

[ 4-10] 156

[ 4-11] ( ) 156

[ 4-12] , 157

[ 4-13] , ( ) 157

[ 4-14] , 158

[ 4-15] , ( ) 158

[ 4-16] 159

[ 4-17] ( ) 159

[ 4-18] () 160

[ 4-19] 160

[ 4-20] 161

[ 4-21] 162

[ 4-22] (KOSHA) 163

- VI -

[ 4-23] 164

[ 4-24] 164

[ 4-25] 165

[ 4-26] 165

[ 4-27] 167

[ 4-28] 168

[ 4-29] 168

[ 4-30] 169

[ 4-31] ( ) 169

[ 4-32] () 172

[ 4-33] 172

[ 4-34] 173

[ 4-35] 173

[ 4-36] 174

[ 4-37] 174

[ 4-38] 177

[ 4-39] 178

[ 4-40] 178

[ 4-41] 179

[ 4-42] , 180

[ 4-43] , 180

[ 4-44] 181

[ 4-45] 185

[ 4-46] () 186

[ 4-47] 186

[ 4-48] ( ) 187

[ 4-49] 188

[ 4-50] 189

[ 4-51] 190

[ 4-52] 191

- VII -

[ 4-53] 192

[ 4-54] 193

[ 4-55] 193

[ 4-56] 194

[ 4-57] 195

[ 4-58] 195

[ 4-59] , 195

[ 4-60] 198

[ 4-61] () 199

[ 4-62] 199

[ 4-63] 200

[ 4-64] / 202

[ 4-65] / ( ) 202

[ 4-66] 203

[ 4-67] 203

[ 4-68] 204

[ 4-69] 204

[ 4-70] 205

[ 4-71] 205

[ 4-72] 206

[ 4-73] 207

[ 4-74] ( ) 207

[ 4-75] 208

[ 4-76] ( ) 208

[ 4-77] 209

[ 4-78] ( ) 209

[ 4-79] 209

[ 4-80] ( ) 210

[ 4-81] 210

[ 4-82] 221

- VIII -

[ 4-83] ( ) 221

[ 4-84] 221

[ 4-85] 222

[ 4-86] 223

[ 4-87] 224

[ 4-88] 225

[ 4-89] 226

[ 5-1] 228

[ 5-2] 235

[ 5-3] 239

[ 5-4] 246

[ 5-5] () 247

[ 5-6] 251

[ 5-7] 262

[ 6-1] 265

[ 6-2] 2013 6 270

[ 6-3] 2001 272

[ 6-4] 1~3 272

[ 6-5] 274

[ 6-6] 2022 276

[ 6-7] 276

[ 6-8] 278

[ 6-9] 2024 278

[ 6-10] 6 280

[ 6-11] 6 281

[ 6-12] 286

[ 6-13] 286

[ 6-14] KPS 288

[ 6-15] KPS 289

[ 6-16] 2013 291

- IX -

[ 6-17] 294

[ 6-18] 296

[ 6-19] 297

[ 6-20] 300

[ 6-21] 301

[ 6-22] 301

[ 6-23] 302

[ 6-24] 2013 8 1 306

[ 6-25] 308

[ 6-26] (2010 ) 309

[ 6-27] 310

[ 6-28] 313

[ 6-29] 5 317

[ 6-30] 319

[ 6-31] 322

[ 6-32] 4 324

[ 6-33] 325

[ 6-34] 326

[ 6-35] 327

[ 6-36] 328

[ 6-37] 329

[ 6-38] KPS 329

[ 6-39] KPS 330

[ 6-40] 331

[ 6-41] 5 322

[ 6-42] 335

[ 6-43] ( ) 336

- X -

27

31

31

(ASN) 34

EDF ( ) 37

EDF ( ) 38

AREVA 39

63

67

(mSv) 76

76

EDF 77

1 (2010, , %) 85

(2010, , %) 86

87

(2008) 91

93

94

96

118

( : %) 119

125

127

IAEA 138

144

151

- XI -

161

162

175

181

196

201

231

233

(2011) 241

244

(2013) 245

248

249

253

258

270

282

299

307

314

() 334

() 342

- 1 -

, ,

( )

, . . .

. , , . .

, .

. . .

- 2 -

, . .

. . , 5% , .

, , , . . . . , . , , , . , , , .

2006 20 5 1(2008~2030; 2008.8.27) 2020 50~60% , .

- 3 -

. , . , .

. 6(2013 2 22) 4 . , 2027 22.8%, 28.5%, LNG 19.8%, 20.3% . 5 31.9% . 7.2% 20.3% . . . 4~5 15~20% . 6 : 2,740MW:8,000MW, LNG : 1,300MW:3,760MW. : 1:3 .

, . . . , . . . .

- 4 -

, .

KPS , , .

, , . , , .

, , , , . .

. . .

- 5 -

1

. . 30% 80% .

60% . 2012 . .

. . 58 . .

2012 . , .

- 6 -

, .

. 78% 2025 50% . 2013 1,000 , 2013 10 .

2000 . 1 (EDF) , . . , 20% 80% .

. 1997 , . 2013 1 . .

,

- 7 -

. . EDF AREVA . . 2009 12 UAE , . .

, . . , . 20 . IAEA , .

, . . . 2013 2 , . . .

- 8 -

2 ,

. . , .

, . , . , , . , .

. 3 , , . 2020 , 1990 40% , , 1990 20% , , 30% , , 14% . .

- 9 -

: 1998 . 1998 . 1998 (Energiewirtschaftsgesetz) , , , .

2 . . 2007 EU 4 . , 4 . .

, , . . . (Atomgesetz) , . , , , . (BMU) . , . , 7 , .

2000 3 (EEG: Erneuerbare-Energie-Gesetz) .

- 10 -

, , . , . 20 1999 5% 10 16% .

. 2013 47% . 2012 140 200 . , , , . 2012 .

, . . , . . , .

- 11 -

3

. 1974 , 1999 JCO , 2011

, , .

. , . , .

, . .

4

, .

- 12 -

. () . , . , , , .

(6 )

(2 ) . IAEA, NRC, . 2012 Hanford Richland , .

6 , , 5 . , , , , . Hanford , . . , .

, , . , . . , OJT ,

- 13 -

. .

, , Hanford . . . , , .

, , Hanford , , . , , . . , , . , .

, , , . (, , ) . ( , , , , )

- 14 -

. .

, , Hanford . . , . . .

, , , , . , . , .

, , (, KPS) . . , , . .

- 15 -

5

. , . .

. , . .

, , . .

, , .

- 16 -

6

. 2001 , MB . , , . , . . .

, . , KPS, , . 1 7 , . , , . . . . . , . , .

.

- 17 -

. , . , , , . , , .

, KPS, , . , . . , KPS, . 2001 2 , .

KPS , . KPS . , . KPS . , . .

.

- 18 -

, . , . . . (A/E) .

. , . , , . . , , . .

, , , . , . . . .

, . ,

- 19 -

. . . . , KPS, , 4 , . . , . , - - .

KPS, , . . . . .

- - . . , , , , .

() . Security, , , .

- 20 -

, . , , . , . , , .

- 21 -

1

1

. . .

.

, 1 . .

, . 5 , .

, . 2008 , 80% 1 2012 3 2025 50% .

,

- 22 -

. , .

, . .

. . 2 , . 3 . 4 .

2

1.

1) (1945~1958)1)2)

1944 8 . . . 1945 10 18(CEA: Commissaria

1) www-dsv.cea.fr/far-center/la-pile-zoe2) Mallevre, 2007.

- 23 -

t l'nergie atomique et aux nergies alternatives) . (Fontenay aux roses) (Le Fort de Chtillon) . CEA (Bouchet) . (ZOE)3) 1947 . CEA -(Frdric Joliot-Curie) ZOE 15 (Les Echos Blogs, 2011). 1948 12 15 ZOE . 1949 11 20 4 . .4)

1952 1958 -- 1 . 1952 CEA EL2 (Sacaly) . , . 1957 EL3 . (UNGG) (Mallevre, 2007). (Marcoule) 3 . G1 1956, G2 1958, G3 1959 . , G1 40MW 150MW.5) CEA .6)

2) (1958~1973)7)

3) ZOE Z , O , E .4) ZOE 1976 3 , 1977 .5) Le journal de physique et radium, vol.18, no.10, (1957.10)6) www.vie-politique.fr7) www.vie-politique.fr

- 24 -

(Mallevre, 2007). , . 1960 2 13

. .

, (Pierrelatte) . 1958 .

, . 1963 CEA EDF UNGG . 1966 1971 6 . (Chinon), (St Laurent des Eaux), (Buget) . 60MW 540MW. 1960 5% . 1969 11 13 - . EDF (Fessenheim) 2 . 1970 (Chooz) , (Marcoule) 250MW (Phnix) . 1973 (SCSIN) .

3) (1974~1986)8)

1974 9) . 1974 3 6 900MW 13 .10) 1976 (Jacques chirac)

8) Mallevre, 2007.9) (kippour) 197310 6 10 25

, 4 .10) (Messemer) .

- 25 -

1200MW (Superphnix) (Greys-Malville) . CEA (Cogema) . 1977 7 31 , . EDF (Creys-Malville) 1985 9 . CEA (ANDREA) 1979 11 10 .

(Palier) P4 1977 1982 (Framatome) (westinghouse) 1300MW 8 , 1984 1987 .11) 1300MW 12 P4 .12) 1979 1984 , 1987 1994 .

1981 NTCA(Nuclear Technical Cooperation Agreement) . , . 1980 . 1979 (Three Mile Island) 1980 (Saint-Laurent) . 515MW A2 20kg . 4 . ,

11) 8 Flamanville 12, Paluel 1-4, Saint-Alban 12 .12) 12 Belleville 12, Cattenom 1-4, Golfech 12, Nogent 12, Penly 12

.

- 26 -

, .

4) (1986~2000)

1986 4 26 . . 1986 4 28 (SCPRI: Service central de protection contre les rayonnements ionisants) . SCPRI (Pierre Pellerin) .

. , (Aores) . . 4 30 (Monaco) . . (Libration) 1986 5 2 . . , .

1986 0.025mSv, 0.4mSv. . 12 1998 . .13)

- 27 -

: eokerne.over-blog.com/article-32054624.html

, . . 1986 P4 N4 . N4 1450MW 4 . 1984 1991 , 1998 1999

13) Consquence de la catastrophe de Tchernobyl en France, (2013.4.17 ).

- 28 -

. 1992 .

, . . 1300MW 2 3 . (Siemens) 1989 4 13 , . . . 1450MW . , . 1995 , 1997 .

, 1991 . 1994 9 20 . 1997 (Lionel Jospin) (Superphnix) . 1998 2 . 1998 9 .14)

5) (2000~)15)

2000 , . 2000-108 2000 2 10 .

14) industrie nuclaire en France, (2013.3.15 )15) industrie nuclaire en France, (2013.3.15 )

- 29 -

EDF . 2002 3 . 2004 7 , 2007 7 .

. 2001 CEA-industrie . 2004 8 (EDF) (GDF) , . EDF (Flamanville) 3 EPR . 2005 , 3.3 . 2009 EDF 2 2014 . 5 .

2007 450kWh . EDF , . , 2010 12 2011 7 . EDF 100TWh .

2. 16)

16) MEDDE, Confrence Internationale sur lAccs au Nuclaire Civil, (2010.3.9).

- 30 -

1970 . , . , . , . , .

. . , 63GW 58 . 104 2 . 1974 30 , 78% , .

2005 . . 1973 22.7% 50% . . 17) 2008 . . , .18) OECD 30 .

17) (DGEMP) .18) kWh , 430g,

800~1050g, 6g .

- 31 -

: industrie nuclaire en France, (2013.4.5. )

: sciences.blogs.liberation.fr/.a/6a00e5500b4a648833017d4053adf6970c

- 32 -

Fessenheim FESSENHEM-1 920 1971 1978Fessenheim FESSENHEM-2 920 1972 1978Saint-Vulbas BUGEY-2 945 1972 1979Saint-Vulbas BUGEY-3 945 1973 1979Pierrelatte TRICASTIN-1 955 1974 1980

Saint-Vulbas BUGEY-4 917 1974 1979Pierrelatte TRICASTIN-2 955 1974 1980

Saint-Vulbas BUGEY-5 917 1974 1980Dampierre DAMPIERRE-4 937 1975 1981Pierrelatte TRICASTIN-4 955 1975 1981Gravelines GRAVELINES-2 951 1975 1980Dampierre DAMPIERRE-3 937 1975 1981Dampierre DAMPIERRE-1 937 1975 1980Dampierre DAMPIERRE-2 937 1975 1981Pierrelatte TRICASTIN-3 955 1975 1981Gravelines GRAVELINES-3 951 1975 1981Gravelines GRAVELINES-1 951 1975 1980Gravelines GRAVELINES-4 951 1976 1981

Saint-Laurent ST.LAURENT-B-1 956 1976 1983Saint-Laurent ST.LAURENT-B-2 956 1976 1983

Avoine CHINON-B-2 954 1977 1984Braud-Saint-Louis BLAYAIS-1 951 1977 1981

Paluel PALUEL-1 1382 1977 1985Avoine CHINON-B-1 954 1977 1984Cruas CRUAS-1 956 1978 1984

Braud-Saint-Louis BLAYAIS-3 951 1978 1983Cruas CRUAS-2 956 1978 1985Paluel PALUEL-2 1382 1978 1985

Braud-Saint-Louis BLAYAIS-4 951 1978 1983Saint-Alban ST.ALBAN-1 1381 1979 1986Cattenom CATTENOM-1 1362 1979 1987

Gravellines GRAVELLINES-6 951 1979 1985Flamanville FLAMANVILLE-1 1382 1979 1986

Cruas CRUAS-2 956 1979 1985Cruas CRUAS-3 956 1979 1984

Gravellines GRAVELLINES-5 951 1979 1985Saint-Alban ST.ALBAN-2 1381 1979 1987

[ 1-1]

- 33 -

Belleville BELLEVILLE-1 1363 1980 1988Belleville BELLEVILLE-2 1363 1980 1989

Flamanville FLAMANVILLE-2 1382 1980 1987Paluel PALUEL-4 1382 1980 1986

Cattenom CATTENOM-2 1362 1980 1988Avoine CHINON-B-3 954 1980 1987Nogent NOGENT-1 1363 1981 1988Avoine CHINON-B-4 954 1981 1988Golfech GOLFECH-1 1363 1982 1991Nogent NOGENT-2 1363 1982 1989SMCP PENLY-1 1382 1982 1990

Cattenom CATTENOM-3 1362 1982 1991Cattenom CATTENOM-4 1362 1983 1992Chooz-B CHOOZ-B-1 1560 1984 2000Golfech GOLFECH-2 1363 1984 1944SMCP PENLY-2 1382 1984 1992

Chooz-B CHOOZ-B-2 1560 1985 2000Civaux CIVAUX-1 1561 1988 2002Civaux CIVAUX-2 1561 1991 2002

: SMCP Saint-Martin-en-Campagne et Penly : industrie nuclaire en France, (2013.4.5. )

3. 19)

1)

, , , . . .

2)

19) Pontier, 2010 .

- 34 -

(ASN: Autorit de sret nuclaire). 2006 6 . . .

(ASN)

: . : ASN

, . ASN 5

- 35 -

. 3 , . 6 , .

3)

(CEA: Commissariat l'nergie atomique et aux nergies alternatives) 1945 . CEA . , , . .

(ANDRA: Agence nationale pour la gestion des dchets radioactifs) 1991 . . 1979 11 (CEA) . 1991 12 . . . (Planning Act: Concerning the Sustainable Management of Radioactive Materials and Waste) 6 (PNGMDR: National Management Plan for Radioactive Materials and Waste) 2006 3 .

(IRSN: Institut de radioprotection et de sret nuclaire) 2001 5 (Waste Law: Research Activities on the Management of Radioactive Waste) 2001 .

- 36 -

. , , , , . 2002 . , , , , , . 5 24 . , . , .

4)

(EDF: lectricit de France). EDF . 2 1946 . . 250 . 2 1946 . . . 1990 EDF . 2004 EDF . . EDF . 6 EDF 70% . 2007 EDF . 158,000 2,

- 37 -

000 .

EDF ( )

: EDF, 2013. EDF ( )

- 38 -

: EDF, 2013. AREVA

- 39 -

: AREVA

- 40 -

(AREVA) , . 79 , 8.4 , 3.6 . , , , . AREVA 5 , 48,000 .

4.

1) 20)

1 . (Plan contract) . 1971 1 (1971-1975) , 2 (1985-1989), 3 (1989-1992), 4 (1993-1996) . 1 4.85% , 8% , 1.85% , 5% , .

. , . , . , . 2 .

3 . , 3%

20) , 2010.

- 41 -

. . 4 .

2) EDF 21)

EDF . 50% . . EDF .

EDF . 1986 . , EDF . , . .22) , . EDF . .

21) , 2009.22) EDF GDF .

. . 2002 (Jean-Pierre Raffarin) . EDF , 2003 . . EDF .

- 42 -

EDF . , 2000 2 .23) , 2006 . 50~70% . , . EDF 1980 , . .24) , EDF . EDF . .

EDF .25) EDF 2 1946 . EDF , , . EDF (CGT: Confdration gnrale du travail) , 1945 .

EDF . , . . ,

23) ( (Loi du 10 fvrier 2000 relative la modernisation et au dveloppement du servuce public de llectricit))

24) (Moselle) 6000 . 25) , 2009.

- 43 -

. , . EDF . , 1% . , . EDF .

3) EDF 26)

EDF 1996~2008 10 . EDF . 1990 EDF , , . EDF .

1996 12 19 (Commission europenne) . 1999 2 19 . . , .

. 1 (EDF) (GDF) . EDF-GDF . .

. , EDF

26) , 2009.

- 44 -

. 2004 EDF . 2004 6 EDF .

. . EDF . , .27) . (Fitoussi) EDF 50% 3 . 2003 .

EDF . EDF 2004 , 2005 10 (Dominique de villpin) EDF . EDF 15% , 15% 600~800 . .

2000 2

27) , .

- 45 -

(CRE: Commission de rgulation de lnergie) . 2003 1 , 2004 8 , 2005 7 , 2006 12 , 2007 7 , 2008 1 .

4) 28)

(EDF), (RTE: Reseau de Transport Electricite), (Powernext) . . EDF , 85 . EDF 90 , 10 CNR, SNET, VPP, Shem . EDF .

RTE . 2005 EDF . (Powernext) , 1 (Day-ahead market) . . (Nord-pool) .

(CRE) , 2000 3

28) , 2010.

- 46 -

. CRE , . CRE , 3 , . 2007 CRE .29)

1 2005 6 (CRE) . , 4,250kWh, 2,950kWh . 69 . 1% 250kWh 3 2 . 20 . 26 , 13 . 6 .

5) 30)

. 1999 .31) -ANP(Advanced Nuclear Power) .32) . 2001 9 , , (Technicatome) (ARE

29) RTE (UFE) 2006 10 .

30) industrie nuclaire en France, (2013.4.10 ).31) 34%, 20%, CEA-Industrie 20%, EDF 20%,

Alcatel 10% .32) 66%, 34% .

- 47 -

VA) . . 2003 11 (URENCO) . 2006 AREVA . , AREVA NC, AREVA NP, AREVA TA .

5. 33)

1)

2000~3000 . 80% ,(rem) . EDF . . . .

. . . . BBC , .

33) Sortir du nuclaire, Comptitivit et sous-traitance nuclaire : servitude et nouvelle forme desclavage, no.35, (2007.6).

- 48 -

. (Chinon) .

(outsourcing) 1980 . EDF . EDF . 1988 . 5 20% 80% . EDF . EDF 34) . , .

1990 85,000, 3 1993 220,000 .35) 3 1993 220,000 . . , . EDF .

EDF . 15 , . . , . . EDF .

34) , , , , 35)

.

- 49 -

2)

. . . . 1980 85% 1992 71% . EDF (4~9) , . 1994 82% .

. , . . . 36) . , , . . .

3)

. . , . , .

36) , , , , ,

- 50 -

. , . .

1,000 25,000 80% . EDF 11~15 . 37) . , 20mSv .38) . EDF , . . . .

3

1.

2 2 , .

37) mSv , .

38) 100mSv (www.bastamag.net/article1221.html).

- 51 -

2011 . 3 2011 2012 . 2011 .

2011 3 11 , . 20 1986 .39) , . , .

1) 40)

, 2012 1 .41) . , , , .

39) Le Point, les-consequences-de-fukushima-en-france, (2013.3.11).40) , , (2012.1).41) (M.Claude Birraux) ,

(MM. Christian Bataille) (Bruno Sido) . 2011 6 30 .

- 52 -

. , , . .

. (Christian Bataille) (Bruno Sido) .

2) 42)

. (PS: Parti Socialiste) . , . (Roussely) .

. 58 30 .

42) (PS), , (2011.3.15).

- 53 -

. . .

3)

(Les verts) EU . , . , . . .43)

. , , . , 2050 100% .

1970 , .

43) (EELV), , (2011.4.11).

- 54 -

10 . (Fessenheim) 1970 (Ble) (Strasbourg) . . . 2000 . EDF . , 2011 3 9 .

. . , . , .44)

4) 45)

. , (ASN) . EDF 10 500 100 . AREVA

44) (EELV), , , (2011.3.14).

45) le point, Les consquences de Fukushima en France, (2013.3.11).

- 55 -

80%~50% , 94000 .

, 1000~2500 . . (IRSN) , 43000 20% . IRSN 58 , .

. 1 2013 3 (Dimanche Ouest France) . , 58% 42% . (Green peace) CSA 46) . . 80% .

2. 47)

2012 . , 2012 .

46) 2012 3 26 CSA Greenpeace .

47) le Point, Le nuclaire, atome de discorde entre les Verts et le PS, (2011.3.19).

- 56 -

, . . .

2030 . (Agence France-Press) . .

. .

EDF AREVA . AREVA () . 1970 1980 , . .

3. 2012

1) 48)

- 57 -

(1) (Franois Hollande)

78% 2025 50% .49) 85% . 24 , (Fessenheim) 2 . 2025 50% .

, . (Flamanville) (EPR) . 2011 12 . . . .

48) groupes.sortirdunucleaire.org/Les-positions-des-candidats49) 41 .

. . 2025 78% 50% . . . .

- 58 -

. . .

(2) (Nicolas Sarkozy) (Union pour un Mouvement Populaire)

. , , . 2011 11 (Pierrelatte) , . .

3 . EPR . 4 . . 2010 .

(3) (Eva Joly)(Europe Ecologie Les Verts)

. . , .

2030 .

- 59 -

. 2020 50 . .

2)

(1) 50) (green peace)

. 2012 1 26 . 2025 50% , . (Karine Gavand) . . .

3000 (FNE) . FNE (Benot Hartmann) . . .

(2) 51) 10

.

50) Le Monde, Pour Greenpeace, Hollande "se contredit" sur le nuclaire, (2012.1.26).

51) Le figaro, Le lourd enjeu des emplois du nuclaire, (2011.11.18).

- 60 -

. . 20 (MOX)52) . . .

. 1 . 120 , 0.71% . .53)

, . EDF (Henri Proglio) 100 . . 2010 (CAS: Centre d'analyse stratgique) 44 .54) (Dominique Auverlot) .

3) 55)

. , 1

52) MOX mixed oxide fuel , (PuO2) (UO2) . MOX .

53) EDF, AREVA, CEA 10,000~125,000 , 4% .

54) 37 .55) www.lemonde.fr/resultats-election-presidentielle

- 61 -

50% , 1 2 . 2012 4 22 1 [ 1-2] . 28.6% 27.1% 2 .

Franois

Hollande

Nicolas

Sarkozy

Marine

Le Pen

Jean-Luc

Mlenchon

Franois

BayrouEva Joly

Parti Socialiste

()

Union pour un

Mouvement

Populaire

()

Front National

()

Front de

gauche

()

Mouvement

Dmocrate

()

Europe

Ecologie

les Verts

() 28.63% 27.18% 17.90% 11.10% 9.13% 2.31% 10,272,705 9,753,629 6,421,426 3,984,822 3,275,122 828,345 : 4 .

[ 1-2] 1 (2012.4.22)

2 2 2012 5 6 . 17.9% , 4% . 11.1% 2.3% 5% . 48.3% , 51.6% . .

Franois Hollande( -PS)

Nicolas Sarkozy

( -UMP) 51.63% 48.37% 18,004,656 16,865,340

: 5 15

[ 1-3] 2 (2012.5.6)

- 62 -

4)

(1) 2.2%

17 . 2012 .56) '' . LVMH 2 . . 2013 3 3225000 11.5% . 10.6% 1996 . 25.4% .

. 2 60 . . ' ' . 2013 4 . ' ' .

1 . 2013 5 4 , 1 20% . , , .

56) 1.. , ( 2013.5.5).

- 63 -

' ' ' ' , " . " " .

: directmatin.fr.

.57) . " , " . ''58)

57) , , ( 2013.3.14).58)

- 64 -

. .

. . . '59)' . " , " .

. . " " . . . .

.60) . IFOP 2013 3 17 18 1500

59) 60) , ( 2013.3.20).

- 65 -

, 63% 34% . 4,000 2013 7 2,000, 1,000 .61) . . , .

(2) 1

. 41 . 60 2013 1 .62) , .

, 2025 50% . . .

, 2016 12 . . . .

, . EPR . 2012 12 , .

61) , , ( 2013.4.10).62) Franois Holland, 2013.

- 66 -

, . 2012 . , , 5 .

, 2030 40%, 2040 60% , . . 2012 7 . .

. 2008 4 21 (No. 2008-378) . , , , , , . (CEA) , .63)

2 . .64) EPR

63) http://ehron.jrc.ec.europa.eu/france64) 2012 9 15

. EDF . , . , . , . , EDF . , EDF . -(Francis Rol-Tanguy) .

- 67 -

5 . 2006 . . 2012 12 15 .65)

(3) 66)

. 2012 9 14 , . . , , . 2013 10 .

: , 2013.

(MEDDE, Le Conseil des ministres a nomm Francis ROL-TANGUY, dlgu interministriel la fermeture de la centrale nuclaire et la reconversion du site de Fessenheim, 2012.12.12).

65) lyse, Conseil de politique nuclaire, (2012.10.15).66) , 2013.

- 68 -

. , .67) , 78% .68) , .69) , , .70)

67) 2011 1 266Mtoe( ) 34%, 15%, 4%, 41%, 4%, 2% . 97% , 872 . 248 , 614 , 700 88% . 136.2Mtoe, 115.3Mtoe 85%, 13.9Mtoe 10%, 3.9Mtoe 3% . . 1.09, 0.51, 0.09Mtoe .

68) 2011 563TWh, 442TWh(78%), 55TWh(10%), 65TWh(12%) .

69) 58 80% 1978 1987 . (ASN: lAutorit de sret nuclaire) , .

70) , LNG . . , , . , , PNG, , LNG . , 30%, 21% . . 2020 50% .

- 69 -

. 2012 9 . .

. . 1 35% . , , . , , , , , .

2025 , 2050 . . . 2025 .

. , , , . , . , , .

. .

- 70 -

. , , , .

EDF .71) , . , . , . , . , .

EDF 50,000 .72) 15 550 . EDF . EPR , . EDF 63GW 58 . EDF (ASN) . EDF .

5)

(1) 2012 5

.

71) EDF, Le Groupe EDF Dans La Transition Energetique, (2013.4.18).72) 30000 , 20000 .

- 71 -

. .

EDF . 2013 1 24 , , 250 .73) 5 3 8 . 2016 . EDF 2013 2 8 . . . (Philippe page) .

2013 5 4 500 (Fessenheim) .74) . , , EDF . , . (Michel Sordi) . (Fabienne Stich)

73) francetv, La CGT va contester au Conseil d'Etat la fermeture annonce de Fessenheim, (2013.1.24).

74) francetv, Fessenheim: 400 700 personnes ont manifest contre la fermeture de la centrale nuclaire. (2013.5.4).

- 72 -

. . 2,000 5,000 .

.75) 2013 3 9 4,000 2 . , 18 . , , EDF AREVA . (Sortir du nuclaire) . 58 30 20 . (Chiso Takemoto) , -(yosomono-net) (Yuki Takahata) . (EELV: Europe Ecologie les verts) (Denis Baupin) , (Yves Cochet) .

(2) EDF 20

. EDF

75) liberation, A Paris, une chane humaine pour rclamer l'arrt du nuclaire, (2013.3.9).

- 73 -

2013 3 .76) 2012 22,000, 19,500 , 32,000 . EDF 80% , .

EDF . , . , . . 1,500 , . , . EDF , , .

EDF . EDF . (ASN) . EDF . 1997 EDF 9 , 2004 EDF 13 . , , . , , .

5 . , . , , ,

76) EDF, Les entreprises qui assurent la maintenance du parc nuclaire, (2013.3).

- 74 -

, EDF . , . , . , . 2006 3 77) EDF . , .

(Batho) (Montebourg), EDF (CSFN: Comite Strategique de la Filiere Nucleaire) (Proglio) 2013 1 29 .78) . . . .

, . CGT . . , EDF . , . . CGT . .

77) CFE-CGC, CETC, CFDT78) MEDDE, Ministre du redressement productif, une ambition pour la filire

nuclaire franaise, (2013.1.29).

- 75 -

. , , , , . . , , , . CGT EDF, , , .79)

CGT , 2013 . , , , , , . 2012 7 12 , . . . . EDF . , .

EDF 19,500 . , . 100 .

79) humanite.fr, Les salaris de la sous-traitance du nuclaire doivent voir s'amliorer leurs conditions de vie et de travail!(CGT), (2013.2.15).

- 76 -

2007 .

(mSv)

: 2001 20mSv , 2004 18mSv . 2 16~17mSv (: EDF, 2013)

: 100 : EDF, 2013.

- 77 -

EDF

EDF . (EELV) (clara Osadtchy) 2013 2 24 (Cherbourg-Octeville) , . . AREVA EDF .80)

4 :

80) www.asso-henri-pezerat.org

- 78 -

. 30% 80% . 60% . 2012 2025 50% . 20 . .

, . . EDF AREVA . . 2009 12 UAE , . .

, . . , . 20 .

- 79 -

. 2012 2013 . . . IAEA , . , .

, . 1988 20% 1993 80% . . 2013 2 , , . , . . .

- 80 -

. (2010).EU . . .

. (2013). . , 12(16): 15-21.

. (2009). . . .

Pontier, Par Jean-Marie. (2010) (Les Politiques ET Le Droit De L`Energie Nucleaire En France). , 45(4): 445-537.

Mallevre, Alain. (2007). L'histoire de l'energie nucleaire en France de 1895 nos jours. Amis du Vieux Verneuil.

J. Yvon. (1957). Les piles atomiques en France . Le journal de physique et radium, 18(10): 545-551.

MEDDE. (2010). Confrence Internationale surlAccs au Nuclaire Civil, P.4-5 (2010.3.9).

Sortir du nuclaire. (2007). Comptitivit et sous-traitance nuclaire : servitude et nouvelle forme desclavage. La mobilisation continue, 35: 31-38.

Claude Birraux. (2012). L'avenir de la filire nuclaire.Franois Holland. (2013). 60 engagements pour la France, P.36. Rpublique

franaise.EDF. (2013). Les entreprises qui assurent la maintenance du parc nuclair

e.CFDT. (2008). CFDT Magazine, no.348, (2008.12.1).ASN. (2010). Les Echelles de classement.Thibaut MADELIN. (2012). Nuclaire: EDF sous pression aprs l'incident i

ndit de Penly. Les Echos 21170(19).

- 81 -

81)

EDF . (Michel Pendeleur) . . . 1989 . 46 . , . , 2 . . AREVA (Polinorsud) .

20 . . . . (Tricastin) 82) . (Marcoule) (Michel Bouchon) .(Socatri) . , , , .2008 3 20 CFDT . .

20 .

81) CFDT Magazine, no.348, (2008.12.1).82) , ,

- 82 -

AREVA EDF 50% 80% . EDF 19000 22000 19 . , , . .

1990 2~3 . 18 . . (Marcoule) (Yannick Rouvire) .EDF 1 . , .

. EDF . (Cecile Kegelian) . . 2(rem) . .

- (Jean-pierreBompard) . . . . EDF . . , 20% 80% .

- 83 -

2 ,

1

. . . . .

2/3 . 2 , . 6, 5 , 20% . , .

2011 6 6 , 10

- 84 -

. 2010 2000 (-) . (-) 2021 , 2032 . , . . . .

. , .

. . . 1998 4 (Energiewirtschaftsgesetz) . 2000 , . , .

.

- 85 -

. , . , , , . .

2

1.

(EU) . 2010 1 33.6%, 21.8%, 12.1%, 10.7%, 10.9%, 9.4% .

1 (2010, , %)

: (2011: 3)

- 86 -

, . 1 75.2% . 1990 55% . 97.8%, 81.8%, 100%, 77% . 40%, 16%, 14%, 8%, 7% , 38%, 36%, 20% .

, 22% 1 . . 45% . 1 CO .

(2010, , %)

: (2011: 3)

1 10.9% , 33.6% .

- 87 -

9.4% , 16.4% . 1990 , . .

2.

: (2011:4)

23% . 17 8 , 9GW . (Blackout), , , , , 3% . . 6 13TWh , 60% . .

- 88 -

4.1% 1,449PJ , 1 11% . 22% . 22% , (EEF) 67% . . 9%, 8% .

, . 3 , , . 2020 , 1990 40% 1), , 1990 20% , , 30% , , 14% . , .

. , , , . 2) . .

1) EU 2008-2012 1990 8% , EU 2012 21% . 10 2020 4-%, 2030 55%, 2040 70%, 2050 80-95% .

2) Eon 11,000 . 6,000 2015 95 . 3 3,000, 2,500, 500 .

- 89 -

. , . , . . 2011 375,000 2030 50 . 2010 25% 266 2030 5,897 . , , .

, , , , . 2008 2.5% . 2020 20% 2011 5% . 2009 ( ) . . 2011 6 (Energie der Zukunft) . , . 4 . 2011 13,411(PJ) . 5% 3) , 2020 20% .

3) 1 33.8%, 20.6%, 12.6%, 11.7%, 11%, 8.8%, 1.5% .

- 90 -

. .

3.

80 , 90 , 90 . 1997 EU . EU 2009 . . EU . 1998 (Energiewirtschaftsgesetz) . .

EU 1996 (EU Directive)4) . , , . . ,

4) EU , , , 34 . --- . 4 5 , , , .

- 91 -

. , . 4 . REW, Eon, EnBW, Vattenfall. , 10 2 .

(2008)

: E.ON, 2008

900 . , , , , . , (TSO) . 1998 4 5).

5) RWE AG, EON, Energy AG, Vattenfall, Europe AG,

- 92 -

1998 . , . 1935 . , , . . , . 1998 . 1998 (Energiewirtschaftsgesetz)6) . , , , .

2 . . (Concession Fee), (VAT), (CHP) (RES) . 2006 1 (19.46 /kWh) 40% (7.55 /kWh) . EU , , 4

EnBW .6) 1998 3 2 ,

.

- 93 -

(2007 ).

: KPX , 2007. VAT: , Concession Fee: , RES: ,

CHP:

, 4 . . , . . . 4 .

- 94 -

3

. . .

1.

: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kernkraftwerke_in_ Deutschland.svg 17 , KGR: Pressurised Water Reactor,

KKB: Boiling Water Reactor, KNK: Fast Breeder Reactor, THTR: High Temperature Reactor, KKN: Pressure Tube Reactor, HDR: Superheated Steam-Cooled Reactor

- 95 -

1960/61 1988/89 . 18, 17 12 .

[ 2-1]

50kW 4 , . 8 . 2011 17 20,399(net)MWe . 11 (PWR), 6 (BWR) 18 .

1970 1986 .

1986 (Brockdorf) 2021, 1988 (Emsland) 2022 , 1984 (Grohnde) 2021, 1981 (Grafenrheinfeld) 2015 . 2022 .

- 96 -

2.

(Atomgesetz) , . (BMU:Bundesminister fuer Umwelt, Naturschutz und Reaktorsicherheit).

: http://www.icons.or.kr/pages/view/245/cooper

- 97 -

(Reaktor-Sicherheitskommision) (Strahlen- schutzkommission) . .

. , . . . , , , , , , , , . .

. (Atomgesetz) , . , , , . (BMU) . , . , 7 , .

3.

1) (Reaktor-Sicherheitskommision)

(R SK) (BMU) . 1958

- 98 -

7) . . . .

, , 12 . . 1 , . . (Ausschuss Anlagen und Systemtechnik), (Ausschuss Druckfuehrende Komponenten und Werkstoff), (Ausschuss Reaktorbetrieb).

2) (Automhaftungsrecht)8)

1959 ( (Gesatz ueber die friedliche Verwendung der Kernernergie und den Schutz gegen ihre Gefahren) , , , . 13 .

. . 3

7) . 1962 (Bundesministerium fuer Atomkernenergie und Wasserwirtschaft), 1962 1969 (Bundesministerium fuer wissenschaftliche Forschung), 1969 1972 (Bundesministerium fuer Bildung und Wissenschaft), 1972 1986 (Bundesministerium des Innern), 1986 (BMU) .

8) (2011) .

- 99 -

3 . , . 5 , 5 . . , , , , , .

, , . , , . , . .

, . 1960 3 (Das Pariser uebereinkommen vom 29.07.1960 ueber die haftung gegenueber Dritter auf dem Gebiet der Kernenergie) . . . 10 , 2 .

- 100 -

1500ER(1ER=1US), 100ER . , . . 1975 . 1978 ER SDR(Special Drawing Rights: ) 1982 SDR 12SDR 3 SDR(1SDR=0.622586USD) . 1985 , 10 .

1986 1998 . 2000 6 4 Energie Baden-Wuettemberg AG, Hamburg Elektritaets-Werke AG( Vattenfall Europe), Eon Energie AG, Rheinisch-Wetfaelisches Elektrizitaetswerk AG (2000) . , . 25 . 11 17 , 12 .

3)

, , 9 . , (StrlSchV) , , , , , . ,

- 101 -

(AtVfV) , ( ), . , (AtSMV) , , . , (AtZueV) . , (AtDcekV) , , (AkKostV) . , (KIV) , , (AtAV) . , (Endlager VIV) .

. . (Gefahr)-(Risiko)-(Restrisiko) 3 .9) (Gefahr) . (Risiko) . . . . (Restrisiko) , . .

,

9) (2011), .

- 102 -

. .

. (Genehmingung von Anlagen) 7 . , , , , , . .

. , . , . (Stoermassnahmen) 3 , . , , , , , .

. , , , , 3 , , , , , , , . , (Gemeinde)

- 103 -

. , . , , (Berechtigung zum Besitz) 10), , , , , .

2002 (Pflicht zur periodischen Sicherheitsueberpruefung) . . 10 .

4 ,

1.

. 1 1998 2005 . 1986 . 1988 . 2000 (Atomkonsens) . 2002 , 2021

10) ,

- 104 -

. 2000 4 .

2 2005-2011 . 2005 -(CDU-CSU) . . 12 . 2002 12 2035 . 17 1980 8 8 , 9 14 .

3 2011 2011 3 13 2 . 5 . 17 1980 7 (Kruemmel) , 17 . , , 17 . 5 . 6 13 , 8 , 2022 .

2.

- 105 -

. . 11).

2 1950 NATO , 1955 . . , . , 1965 5 100MW 5 12) (, 2001: 34). . . , .

. . . 1986 2011 . . ,

11) 200 DM .12) (AEG),

(Siemens), (Deutsche Babock & Wilcox) (BBC) . (General Electric) (Westinghouse) , .

- 106 -

. (- ) .

. . 1954 . . .

1972 1-3 . (Anti-AKW-Bewegung) . . (BUKO: Bundeskongress Unabhaengiger Friedensgruppen) . , , . 1975 (Wyhl)13) . . 14) .

13) 1975 2 . . , , 7 .

14) . . (1931)

- 107 -

. .

1970 . 1981 (, 2001)15). , 80 .

1986 . . , . 1985 . 1989 48 ( 2012, ). , .

. . ,

. 15) 1,300MW

145 , 20-30 104 .

- 108 -

, . , . . . (, 2013). . .

. . (Wyhl) (Kaiserstuhl) . , . - .

. , . , , .

- 109 -

3.

1)

1970 . 1979 (Sonstige politische Vereinigung DIE GRUENEN) 1980 . (Kitschelt) .(Kitschelt, 1986)

. 1983 5.6% 27 , 1987 8.3% 44 . , . 1989 90 , 18 1998 () . , .

. . 10 . . 100 . . ,

- 110 -

. , . 2000 . 2002 16) . 2003 11 (Stade), 2005 5 (Obrigheim) .

. , 32 , , , , 2005 7 1 . 2021 . . , 2000 2005 (, 2012). .

. 2011 6 30 13 4 17).

16) , 19 , , 2021 .

17) 2011 3 20 7% . 3 37 58 24% .

- 111 -

17% 2011 19.2% 2020 35%, 2050 80% .

2)

. 2000 3 (EEG: Erneuerbare-Energie-Gesetz) . , , . . , . . 20 1999 5% 10 16% .

, . 4 Eon 2011 13 . , 18) , .

2004 16 2010 36 7,000 (BMU, 2011). 2030 50 . 40

.18) 2020 355, 2030 50%, 2040 65%, 2050 80%

.

- 112 -

. .

. . . 1999 4 . .

2013 47% . 1Kw 3.592 5.277 . 2012 140 200 . , , 19), . 2012 (EGG) , .

. . .

19) . . .

- 113 -

5 :

. , . , .

. . . , . 2000 . . .

, . 1980 1970 , 2011 . , .

,

- 114 -

. . . . , .

, . . , . .

, . . . , . , . .

- 115 -

. 2011. . 30. p. 2-37.

. 2012. . . p. 214-246.

. 2011. . . Vol.24 No.1. p. 261-303.

. 2006. . . 2006. 6.

. 2001. : . 9 2. p. 27-49.

. 2013., , - . 24. p.125-148.

. 2011. : . FES Information Series. Friedrich Ebert Stiftung.

. 2011. . 20.

. 2012. . KPTEP Issue Paper. 04.

. 2012. . .

Christian Hildengass. 2011. Atom Kraft und Protest. Die politische Wirkung der Anti-AKW-Bewegung in Deutschland, Frankreich und Schweden. Muenschen: oekom.

EON. 2008. Business Overviews, Facts and Figures.Kitschelt Herbert P. 1986. Political Opportunity Structure and Political

Protest: Anti-Nuclear Movements in four Democracies. in British Journ

- 116 -

al of Political Science. Vol. 16. No.1. p. 57-85.Dieter Rucht. 1980. Von Wyhl nach Gorleben: Buerger gegen Atomprog

ramm und nukleare Entsorgung. Muenchen: Beck.SPD und Buendnis90/Die Gruenen. 1998. Aufbruch und Erneuerung Deu

tschlands Weg ins 21. Jahrhundert. Koalitionsvereinbarung. Bonn Thomas Saretzki & Peter Feindt(Hg.). 2009. Umwelt- und Technikkom

flikte. VS Verlag.

Atomgesetzhttp://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/atg/index.htmlBundesministerium fuer Umwelt, Naturschutz und Reaktorsicherheithttp://www.bmu.de/themen/atomenergie-strahlenschutz/http://www.bmu.de/themen/atomenergie-strahlenschutz/atomenergie-sich

erheit/bundesaufsicht-bei-atomkraftwerken/http://www.bmu.de/themen/atomenergie-strahlenschutz/atomenergie-sich

erheit/downloads/RWE http://www.rwe.com/web/cms/de/465424/lieferanten/arbeitssicherheit/

- 117 -

3

1

1953 (Atoms for peace) . 1950 , , 3 . , , (), .

, . 2011 3 . .

2

50. 2011 54, 1 1~4 50 . 4,630kW ,

- 118 -

3,4( 118kW) .

1970 (PWR, Pressurized Water Reactor) (BWR, Boiling Water Reactor) . 26, 24, ABWR 2 . .

1)

1) , , 2012.6.

- 119 -

2010 27.5% . . 2005 () 2030 40% , . .

, , 2011 10.7%, 2012 1.7% .

( : %)2)

2012 5 5 3 42

2) , , http://www5.fepc.or.jp/tokei/

- 120 -

. 7 1 3 57 , .

3

1. (1950~1970 )

1945 8 2 . 1952 4 .

1953 , (Atoms for peace) , . 1954 () 3) 2 3,5004) .

2 3,500 . 3 , , . 1954 23,500 .

3) , (1982~1987) .

4) 235 .

- 121 -

3 , , . 3 , , 1955 .

[ 3-1] 5)

(1950 ~ 1970)

1952.7 1955.12 , 1956.1 1956.5 ( )1957.6 1964.7 1973.7

(1970 ~ 1990 )

1975.2 (1976.7.)1976.1 1978.6 ( )1978.10

(1990 ~ )

1997.12 1998.6 1999.7 2000.4 ( )2001.1 ( , )2002.6 2012.9

5) , (), 2013.7.

- 122 -

1955 12 1956 1 . 6) . , 3 . 1957 , , , .

2. (1970 ~ 1990 )

1960 . 1974 . . . 1975 2 . . 1975 3 34 1976 7 . , ,

6) .

- 123 -

, , . , , -, .

1977 10 . , , . , , .

. . 7) 8 8) , , , , , 8 .9)

3. JCO (1990 ~ )

7) 3 3 .

8) 3 8 .9) , , , 2013.3.

- 124 -

1997 . 1998 6 .

1999 9, JCO . JCO . 2 667 , 10km 31 .

JCO . 2000 , . 2000 4 , 2001 . 2003 (JNES) . JNES , , .

4

1950 2000 . , . ,

- 125 -

2 .

10)

10) , , , 2011.10.

- 126 -

, . , , 1970 . , .

. 2011 8 , .11)

, , . 480 350, 70, 45 . 19 No return rule . 8 .

. IAEA () 12) , . JCO , .

11) , , , 2013.3.

12) , .

- 127 -

.

8 . 3( ) . 3 ( ), 8 ( ) , 3 .

13)

,

13) , , , , 2013.8.

- 128 -

, 40 .

5 :

. , JCO , .

, . . .

/ . , 1950 .

, . .

- 129 -

, , , 2011.12.

, , , 2012.1.

, (), 2013.7. , , , 2013.3. , http://www.nsr.go.jp/ http://www.aec.go.jp/ , http://www.cnic.jp/, , , 2011.10., , http://www5.fepc.or.jp/tokei/, , , 2009.2., , ,

, 2013.8.

- 130 -

4 1)

1

1.

, . . , . , . . , . , .

. , , . , , . , , , .

1)

- 131 -

.

. , . (top-down) .

. 2000 . . , .

( ) . , .

(high hazard industry) . , .

, (safety culture) . , (IAEA, NRC, ) .

- 132 -

2. : 2)

1)

, , , . .

20 (accidents)3) . , , (Nichols, 1997).

(, ) , , . , .

. , (Hale, 2000).

1960 1990 4 (Hollnagel, 1993).

2) 2 ( , 2012) .

3) incident accident . (event) . , , . near miss , incident . incident accident , near miss .

- 133 -

(Reason, 1995).

, . , . , (Hale, 2000).

, , . , . () , (FRA, 2008).

. . / . (high reliability organization)4) .

4) , , , , , .(Weick & Roberts, 1993; Weick & Sutcliffe, 2007). , (normal accident) (Perrow, 1984) . (Three Mile Island accident) , (interactive complexity) (tight-coupling) , . . , , , , , .

- 134 -

, , . . .

2)

1990 . () ( ) . , . .

, , . . . . , . , , .

, . , . , , ,

, .

- 135 -

(Turner & Pidgeon, 1997). , , . , . , . , , . , (OLeary & Pidgeon, 1995; Edmonson, 1996). , .

, (Cooke, 2003). , , (Van Dyke, 2006). .

, , , (flexible culture) (Reason, 1997; Weick & Sutcliffe, 2007). , (Weick et al., 1999). , , . . , . .

, (redundancy) (Roberts, 1990; Clarke, 2005).

- 136 -

, , . , ( , ) (Hofmann et al., 1995). , (coginitive infrastructure) , (Weick et al., 1999). , . . , , (Streeter, 1992). , , .

. , , . , .

, . , . NRC , , 3 , . . , .

- 137 -

/

(co-ordination)

[ 4-1]

3) , ,

, IAEA INSAG(International Nuclear Safety Group) 1986 . , , .

IAEA: (IAEA, 1991) INPO(Institute of Nuclear Power Operations): , , (INPO, 2004). Reiman & Odedewald(2009): , , , , .

(Farrington-Darby et al., 2005).

- 138 -

IAEA . IAEA .

IAEA

- 139 -

, , - , , , (, ,

), - , (, , ) - , - (perspective thinking),

, - , ,

- , ,

- , , - , , - , , - , , - , ,

[ 4-2] IAEA

IAEA 5 (IAEA, 2006). , , , , . IAEA .

- 140 -

- ,

- ,

- , , - , , - , - , (ownership)

- , , , , - /, , , - , , , (cross-functional),

- , - / , //

- , - , , - , , , ,

- 141 -

, ,

- , , , - ,

, , 2002 Davis Besse .

NRC(the National Regulatory Commission) , IAEA . 1994 1996 (Safety Conscious Working Envionment; SCWE) , 2005 .

NRC , , NRC , . , , .

3.

1)

, , . ,

- 142 -

, . , .

. , , (socio-technical system).

. (occupational safety) . , (D.O.E., 2009). .

. , , IAEA NRC, . (U.S. Department of Energy) 2012 Hanford Richland Operations Office Site( Hanford Site) SCWE . Hanford Site NRC SCWE (Nuclear Energy Institute), INPO (D.O.E, 2012). 4 21 , 130 . 2012 6 , Hanford Richland Site 2,964 .

- 143 -

, , , , ,

- - - - , , , - , - -

, ,

- - -

- -

, , , ,

-

- -

- - - -

, ,

-

- - -

[ 4-3] Hanford Site

2)

Hanford Site 25 , . IAEA 5) ,

5) .

- 144 -

. 6

, . 6 2 8 .

8 (6), (2) .

NRC, Safety Culture and Climate Survey(2009b); NRC, Safety Culture and Climate Survey(2012); D.O.E., Assessing Safety Culture in DOE Facilities(2009); D.O.E., Independent Oversight Assessment of Nuclear Safety Culture_Hanford Site Plant(2012); Oliveira & Saxena, Safety culture assessment programme: Satatictical ananlysis of a survey conducted at the IEA-R1 Brazilian research recator(2003); NRC, Results of the Safety Culture Workshop(2012); Swedish Radiation Safety Authority, Indicators of safety culture(2010); IAEA, Self assessment of nuclear safety culture(2002); Cox, Blackett Memorial Lecture-The Nuclear Option: Human Factors in Safety(2007).

- 145 -

.

(6)

(Respectable Work Environment) / / (formalization) / ,

- 146 -

(Questioning Attitude)

(Commitment to Safety)

(2)

,

, . , , .

- 147 -

, .

, 4 . . 3 , , KPS . 3 .

3)

4 , . ( ), KPS, , 4 . 2,000.

, , . KPS, , 2013 5 10 24 , 6 3 15 . 2013 6 20 , 1,771.

1 1 . SPSS for Window 12.0 .

2013 2 18 20( , , KPS), 3 21(KPS ), 4 12(), 4 19( ) . .

- 148 -

2

1.

1)

, KPS 33.1% , (27.6%), (23.8%), (15.5%) .

(%) (%)

489 27.6

10 765 43.8KPS 587 33.1 11~20 448 25.6 421 23.8 21~30 495 28.3

274 15.5 30 39 2.2 1771 100 1747 100

70 4.0

20 108 6.2 209 12.0 30 599 34.1

/ 743 42.7 40 589 33.5 441 25.4 50 453 25.8

/ 276 15.9 60 7 0.4 1739 100 1756 100

[ 4-4] *

* , . .

/(42.7%), (25.4%), /(15.9), (12.0%), (4.0%) . .

, 30(34.1%), 40(33.5%), 50(25.8%) , 30 40 70% . 2

- 149 -

KPS

39 16 11 4% 8.4 2.7 2.6 1.5 184 21 3 1% 39.5 3.6 0.7 0.4

/ 181 542 4 16% 38.8 92.3 1 5.9 34 6 398 3% 7.3 1 95.7 1.1

/ 28 2 0 246% 6 0.3 0 91.1 466 587 416 270% 100 100 100 100

20 35 11 40 22% 7.3 1.9 9.6 8.1

[ 4-5]

0 6.2% , 60 0.4% . 20 , 60 .

, 10 , 10 43.8% . 2130(28.3%), 1120(25.6%), 30 (2.2%) . 14.5( 9.5).

2)

, (39.5%), /(38.8), (8.4%), (7.3%), /(6%) . KPS / 92.3% , (3.6%), (2.7%) . 95.7%, (2.6%), /(1%) . /(91.1%), /(5.9%), (1.5%), (3%) .

- 150 -

30 211 144 149 95% 43.9 24.5 35.6 35.2

40 152 243 128 66% 31.6 41.4 30.6 24.450 83 184 99 87% 17.3 31.3 23.7 32.260 0 5 2 0% 0 0.9 0.5 0 481 587 418 270% 100 100 100 100

10 246 196 197 126% 51.6 33.4 47.6 46.811~20 120 176 100 52% 25.2 30 24.2 19.321~30 88 210 106 91% 18.4 35.8 25.6 33.830 23 5 11 0% 4.8 0.9 2.7 0

477 587 414 269% 100 100 100 100

, 30 43.9% 30 . 40(31.6%), 50(17.3%), 20(7.3%) . KPS 40(41.4%) 50(31.3%) , 20 1.9% . 30(35.6%), 40(30.6%), 50(23.7%), 20(9.6%) 20 . 30 35.2% , 50(32.2%), 40(24.4%), 20(8.1%) . 4 50 , KPS.

, 10 (51.6%), 1120(25.2%), 2130(18.4%), 30 (4.8%) , 10 30 . KPS 2130(35.8%), 10 (33.4%), 1120(30%), 30 (0.9%) 10 4 . 10 (47.6%), 2130(25.6%), 1120(24.

- 151 -

2%), 30 (2.7%) . 10 (46.8%), 2130(33.8%), 1120(19.3%) , 30 .

, , , , . 90% /. ( 900 ) 1/3 (, , ) .

, . , , . , 3 , .

2.

- 152 -

6 . , , , , , .

4 3 , . . , KPS .

Hanford , Hanford . Hanford Hanford .

1) (Respectable Work Environment)

, / / , (formalization) , / , 4 .

IAEA , , . .

- 153 -

, .

. , , , . , , .

KPS .

(1) 4 ,

5 . 5 , . ( KPS) . 5 , .

: , (multi-tasking) , , . 5 72% . . 5 1 1 , 2 .

- 154 -

581 687 480 4 2 1754

2.0(%) 33.1 39.2 27.4 0.2 0.1 100

[ 4-6]

, 1.7 . 83%, 78% . KPS(: 2.0) 77% . (2.6) , 66.7%.

212 188 83 0 0 483 1.7(%) 43.9 38.9 17.2 0 0 100

KPS 154 297 133 2 1 587 2.0(%) 26.2 50.6 22.7 0.3 0.2 100

202 126 86 2 1 417 1.7(%) 48.4 30.2 20.6 0.5 0.2 100

13 76 178 0 0 267 2.6(%) 4.7 28.5 66.7 0 0 100F 136.7***

[ 4-7] ( )

: *P

- 155 -

200 214 68 1 0 483 1.7(%) 41.4 44.3 14.1 0.2 0 100

KPS 121 354 110 2 0 587 2.0(%) 20.6 60.3 18.7 0.3 0 100

223 140 52 1 1 417 1.6(%) 53.5 33.6 12.5 0.2 0.2 100

10 92 163 2 0 267 2.6(%) 3.7 34.5 61.0 0.7 0 100F 155.904***

[ 4-8]

554 800 393 6 1 1754 1.9(%) 31.6 45.6 22.4 0.3 0.1 100

. (1.6), (1.7), KPS(2.0), (2.6) , 87%, 86% , KPS 81% .

5 . 61%.

[ 4-9] ( )

: *P

- 156 -

139 222 121 0 0 482 2.0(%) 28.8 46.1 25.1 0 0 100KPS 118 325 140 2 1 586 2.0(%) 20.1 55.5 23.9 0.3 0.2 100 218 139 57 0 2 416 1.6(%) 52.4 33.4 13.7 0 0.5 100

9 60 195 1 0 265 2.7(%) 3.4 22.6 73.6 0.4 0 100 F 176.986***

.

[ 4-10] *

484 746 513 3 3 1749 2.0(%) 27.7 42.7 29.3 0.2 0.2 100

*

, , 1.6 (2.0), KPS(2.0), (2.7) . 130 1 9 , 4000~6000 , .

[ 4-11] ( )

: *P

- 157 -

127 221 131 2 0 481 2.0(%) 26.4 45.9 27.2 0.4 0 100KPS 70 281 232 4 0 587 2.3(%) 11.9 47.9 39.5 0.7 0 100 103 212 97 5 0 417 2.0(%) 24.7 50.8 23.3 1.2 0 100

4 69 193 0 0 266 2.7(%) 1.5 25.9 72.6 0 0 100 F 108.384***

[ 4-12] , *

,

304 783 653 11 0 17512.2

(%) 17.4 44.7 37.3 0.6 0 100

*

, (2.0), (2.0) . KPS 2.3 2.7 .

[ 4-13] , ( )

: *P

- 158 -

252 156 74 1 0 483 1.6(%) 52.2 32.3 15.3 0.2 0 100KPS 137 292 156 2 0 587 2.0(%) 23.3 49.7 26.6 0.3 0 100 71 173 168 4 0 416 2.6(%) 17.1 41.6 40.4 1.0 0 100

8 81 176 2 0 267 2.6(%) 3.0 30.3 65.9 0.7 0 100F 155.115***

. 2.1 3 . 33% .

[ 4-14] ,

,

468 702 574 9 0 17532.1

(%) 26.7 40 32.7 0.5 0 100

[ 4-15] 4 , , (1.6), KPS(2.0), (2.6), (2.6) .

, 84% . KPS 73%, .

[ 4-15] , ( )

: *P

- 159 -

. , 2012 10

, . , .

70% 5 . 2.0, 3 , .

[ 4-16]

502 718 532 1 0 1,7532.0

(%) 28.6 41 30.3 0.1 0 100

, 85% , . 1.7 . KPS(2.0), (2.0), (2.7) .

[ 4-17] ( )

242 167 74 0 0 483 1.7(%) 50.1 34.6 15.3 0 0 100KPS 137 305 144 1 0 587 2.0(%) 23.3 52.0 24.5 0.2 0 100 118 186 112 0 0 416 2.0(%) 28.4 44.7 26.9 0 0 100

5 60 202 0 0 267 2.7(%) 1.9 22.5 75.7 0 0 100F 220.814***

: *P

- 160 -

() : , 41% 13% . , 2.6 Hanford 3.9 .

[ 4-18] ()

Hanford

()

108 332 473 132 14 1,0592.6 3.9

(%) 10.2 31.4 44.7 12.5 1.3 100

: 57% , 14% . 2.4 3 . Hanford 3.3.

[ 4-19]

Hanford

.

239 366 301 139 12 1,0572.4 3.3

(%) 22.6 34.6 28.5 13.2 1.1 100

: 39% . , 3.1 .

. Hanford 4.0 1 .

- 161 -

[ 4-20]

Hanford

97 149 400 333 78 1,0573.1 4.0

(%) 9.2 14.1 37.8 31.5 7.4 100

Hanford . Hanford 3.7 , 2.7 1 . .

(2)

5

- 162 -

. .

TFT .

1. , 2. 3. 4. 5. , 6. ,

[ 4-21]

- 163 -

, . , 8 ( 43).

[ 4-22] (KOSHA)

/ , , / , , , , / , , / , ,

, / , , , ,

/ , , , ,

8 100 , . , [ 4-23] 46.8 50% . () .

, , . , . 56 25% . ,

- 164 -

. ,

47.1 25% .

( _)

( )25% 50% 50% 25% 45.6 33.3 33.4~44.4 44.5~66.6 66.7 56.0 41.6 41.7~50.0 50.1~58.3 58.4 49.1 46.6 46.7~53.3 53.4~60.0 60.1 37.0 - 33.3 33.4~50.0 50.1

46.9 44.4 44.5~50.0 50.1~61.1 61.2 51.3 42.8 42.9~52.3 52.4~61.9 62.0

47.1 55.5 55.6~66.6 66.7~77.7 77.8 41.6 33.3 33.4~41.6 41.7~50.0 50.1

46.8 45.0 45.1~50.7 50.8~56.5 56.6

[ 4-23]

, KPS . KPS 1, 2 , .

*

KPS

() 321 223 338 169 1051(%) 65.8% 38.0% 80.7% 62.6% 59.6%

() 167 364 81 101 713(%) 34.2% 62.0% 19.3% 37.4% 40.4%

() 488 587 419 270 1764(%) 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

[ 4-24]

: * p

- 165 -

*

KPS

() 328 337 246 167 1078(%) 67.6% 57.4% 58.7% 61.9% 61.2%

() 157 250 173 103 683(%) 32.4% 42.60% 41.30% 38.1% 38.8%

() 485 587 419 270 1761(%) 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

[ 4-26]

>KPS>> . .

*

KPS

() 192 221 87 235 735(%) 39.8% 37.6% 20.9% 88.3% 42.0%

() 290 366 329 31 1016(%) 60.2% 62.4% 79.1% 11.7% 58.0%

() 482 587 416 266 1751(%) 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

[ 4-25]

: * p.05

- 166 -

(3) 5

. , , , , 25% . . .

, . , .

. . , .

. , . , . .

NRC 5.73 FATIGUE MANAGEMENT FOR NUCLEAR POWER PLANT PERSONNEL(NRC, 2009a) , , . , . .

2)

- 167 -

. 10 . , . OJT .

, . , , , . 1) ~ 3) ( KPS) , 4) 4 .

(1)

32% . 38.9%, 29% . 2.9 3 . , , .

[ 4-27]

80 259 412 277 31 1,0592.9

(%) 7.6 24.5 38.9 26.2 2.9 100

(2)

- 168 -

, , 33% . 22% . 3.1 .

[ 4-28]

55 181 472 311 40 1,0593.1

(%) 5.2 17.1 44.6 29.4 3.8 100

(3)

33.4% (28.7%) . 2.9 3 . , .

[ 4-29]

( )

93 260 402 264 40 1,0592.9

(%) 8.8 24.6 38.0 24.9 3.8 100

(4) KPS 4

. 4 4 . 84% . 3.3 .

- 169 -

, , . , .

[ 4-30]

21 252 885 584 1742 3.2(%) 1.2 14.5 50.8 33.5 100

, . 3.3 KPS . 3.2, 2.7. 3 . .

[ 4-31] ( )

4 46 215 202 467 3.3 (%) 0.9 9.9 46.0 43.3 100 KPS 4 63 293 226 586 3.3 (%) 0.7 10.8 50.0 38.6 100 2 48 248 121 419 3.2 (%) 0.5 11.5 59.2 28.9 100

11 95 129 35 270 2.7 (%) 4.1 35.2 47.8 13.0 100 F 47.351***

: *P

- 170 -

(5)

, . , , . . .

, . . OJT , . , .

3)

, . . , . ( ) . . . , .

- 171 -

.

() . , , .

(flexible) , . , . . , . , , .

6 , (, KPS) . Hanford . 6 5 , 5 .

(1) ()

44% , 20% . , , 3.3 3 . , Hanford 4.4 1.1 .

- 172 -

[ 4-32] ()

Hanford

()

41 165 384 387 82 1,0593.3 4.4

(%) 3.9 15.6 36.3 36.5 7.7 100

(2)

, 3.3 . , Hanford 0.9 .

[ 4-33]

Hanford

,

37 140 392 397 92 1,0583.3 4.2

(%) 3.5 13.2 37.1 37.5 8.7 100

(3)

, 3.3 . . . 48% , .

Hanford 4.5 Hanford . . 3.3 Hanford

- 173 -

. .

[ 4-34]

Hanford

,

61 168 317 373 139 1,0583.3 4.5

(%) 5.8 15.9 30.0 35.3 13.1 100

(4)

44% , 14% . 3.3 . Hanford 3.9.

[ 4-35]

Hanford

35 110 444 397 69 1,0553.3 3.9

(%) 3.3 10.4 42.1 37.6 6.5 100

(5) 5

0% . 3.4 . , 3.4 . , .

- 174 -

, .

, . , . Hanford 4.2 3.4 .

[ 4-36]

Hanford

39 114 375 395 135 1,0583.4 4.2

(%) 3.7 10.8 35.4 37.3 12.8 100

(6) ,

3.2. , . Hanford 4.0 .

[ 4-37]

Hanford

,

66 141 447 331 72 1,0573.2 4.0

(%) 6.2 13.3 42.3 31.3 6.8 100

(7) 3

2

- 175 -

. Hanford . 6 3.3 , Hanford 4.2.

, , . , . , (Turner & Nik, 2005).

- 176 -

4)

, , (near miss), (incident), (accident) , .

. , . . , .

. . . (incubation periods) (Turner & Pidgeon, 1997). , (triggering event) . , , .

, , , , ,

- 177 -

, (Questioning Attitude) .

7 , (, KPS) . Hanford . 7 5 , 5 .

(1) ( ), ,

42% , 22% . 22% . 3.2 , , . Hanford 4.5 .

[ 4-38]

Hanford

( ), ,

59 170 384 357 88 1,0583.2 4.0

(%) 5.6 16.1 36.3 33.7 8.3 100

(2) ,

. 24% . 3.1

- 178 -

. Hanford 4.2 . 1.1 .

[ 4-39]

Hanford

77 175 415 316 75 1,0583.1 4.2

(%) 7.3 16.5 39.2 29.9 7.1 100

(3)

40% , 24% . 3.1 . Hanford 4.1 1 . , .

[ 4-40]

Hanford

85 173 374 350 75 1,0573.1 4.1

(%) 8.0 16.4 35.4 33.1 7.1 100

(4)

. , .

,

- 179 -

. , . , .

35% . 2.8 3 . Hanford 3.4 . .

[ 4-41]

Hanford

,

131 240 426 225 37 1,0592.8 3.4

(%) 12.4 22.7 40.2 21.2 3.5 100

(5) , (violation) (lapses)

. , .

, . , .

, 36% , 30% . 3.0 . Hanford 3.7 0.7 .

- 180 -

[ 4-42] ,

Hanford

,

138 184 354 316 66 1,0583.0 3.7

(%) 13.0 17.4 33.5 29.9 6.2 100

(6) , ,

. , . , .

, 3.3 . Hanford 4.1 .

[ 4-43] ,

Hanford

() , ,

50 139 417 366 87 1,0593.3 4.1

(%) 4.7 13.1 39.4 34.6 8.2 100

(7) ,

62% . 11% , . 3.6 Hanford (4.1) .

- 181 -

[ 4-44]

Hanford

,

42 71 285 509 151 1,0583.6 4.1

(%) 4.0 6.7 26.9 48.1 14.3 100

(8) (,

, ) , . IAEA . NRC (SCWE: Safety Conscious Work Environment) , .

, Hanford ,

- 182 -

. , 3.2 Hanford 4.0 . 1990 . 2012 1 . 2007 2012 ( , 2012) .

, . ,

. 102( )6) SCWE . SCWE . , .

, .

6) 102( ): .

1. 202 302 , 353452533 632 783

2. 1

3. 16(34 )22(34 )3747566165778098

- 183 -

. 1 3 , 100 15 . 2012 . , , . , , .

, , . , . . , .

. . .

, , . , , .

- 184 -

5) (Commitment to Safety)

, , , , 4 . , . . , . 3 .

(1) , ,

(, KPS) , 4 . , 5 3 , 4 2.5.

36% . 2.8. , .

. . () . IAEA (failure of corporate memor

- 185 -

y) , (IAEA, 2002). , .

[ 4-45]

.

136 246 399 255 23 1,059 2.8 (%) 12.8 23.2 37.7 24.1 2.2 100

() IAEA (Convention of Nuclear Safety)

11 2 , . , , . .

, (2008 2012) 1,400 . 4 77% 67% , 3 23% 32% . , , . KPS . 2007(16,816) 2012(18,478) 9% , 1,602 1,641 .

() 40.2% , 23.4%

- 186 -

. 64% . .

[ 4-46] ()

() .

248 425 267 101 17 1,058 2.3(%) 23.4 40.2 25.2 9.5 1.6 100

(redundancy)

, . , . . (slack) . .

. 80% . . 3.1 2.5 .

[ 4-47]

*

35 320 822 568 1745 3.1 2.3(%) 2.0 18.3 47.1 32.6 100 100

* ,

- 187 -

, , 3.4, 91% . , 195 , 198 . . .

KPS 3.2 , 87% . .

[ 4-48] ( )

8 51 242 168 469 3.2 (%) 1.7 10.9 51.6 35.8 100KPS 5 73 315 193 586 3.2 (%) 0.9 12.5 53.8 32.9 100 0 37 184 199 420 3.4 (%) 0 8.8 43.8 47.4 100

22 159 81 8 270 2.3 (%) 8.1 58.9 30.0 3.0 100F 168.815***

: *P

- 188 -

(2) : ,

. . , 4 , ~ KPS, , . 4 , 2.5.

4 ,

, (paper work) . .

77% . , . .

[ 4-49]

*

32 350 786 577 1,745 3.1 (%) 1.8 20.1 45.0 33.1 100

* ,

5

- 189 -

70% . , . // 79% . , , . .

[ 4-50]

// *

42 490 813 399 1,7442.9

(%) 2.4 28.1 46.6 22.9 100.

* ,

(, KPS ) ,

. . . , . .

20 , (, ) , . , . ,

- 190 -

. , .

, 92% . . . . . 3.3.

[ 4-51]

13 68 538 438 1,0573.3

(%) 1.2 6.4 50.9 41.4 100

(, KPS ) UAE 4 ,

, , . 1 1,300 , . . .

89% . . 3.2 2.5 .

- 191 -

[ 4-52]

9 102 577 369 1,057 3.2(%) 0.9 9.6 54.6 34.9 100

(, KPS )

. 1990 60 . , 2000 50 , 27(2011) . 2007 2011 13% .7)

. . , (overhaul; O/H) . , , . . , . , , .

7) 2007 ~ 2011 .(: )

2007 594,067 593,811 256 99.92008 617,177 600,551 16,626 97.32009 709,621 669,944 39,677 94.42010 703,255 619,827 83,428 88.12011 801,352 694,472 106,880 86.7

(: , %)

- 192 -

. , . . , . 93% , 57% . , . 3.5 .

[ 4-53]

5 62 383 607 1,0573.5

(%) 0.5 5.9 36.2 57.4 100

(, KPS ) KPS ,

. , 195 . , , . 93% . , . 3.4.

- 193 -

[ 4-54]

7 65 458 527 1,0573.4

(%) 0.7 6.1 43.3 49.9 100

( ) ,

, upgrade, , . . 25 . 85% . , . 3.1 2.5 .

[ 4-55]

2 60 234 123 4193.1

(%) 0.5 14.3 55.8 29.4 100

( ) ,

. , . , .

- 194 -

, 87% . . 3.1 .

[ 4-56]

4 50 246 119 4193.1 (%) 1.0 11.9 58.7 28.4 100

(3)

(ownership) . .

3 , 1) 2) () , 3) .

(, KPS) . Hanford . 3 5 , .

, 39% , 20% . 3.2. , Hanford 4.4 .

- 195 -

[ 4-57]

Hanford

,

53 149 445 344 69 1,0603.2 4.4

(%) 5.0 14.1 42.0 32.5 6.5 100

,

1) 3.2. Hanford 4.4 , 1.2 .

[ 4-58]

Hanford

,

53 149 445 3