Draft Resolution Risk and safety assessments ( stress tests ) of nuclear power plant in the European Union and related activities Amendments proposals In the wake of the end of the stress tests and the publication of the European Commission s communication about this exercise, the ITRE committee took the initiative to draft a resolution on this topic. French authorities welcome such a resolution, which enables the European Parliament to state its opinion on that exercise. Please find hereafter French amendments proposals, which essentially aim at: - reminding the original mandate given to safety authorities and to the European Commission, and the key role played by safety authorities to both conduct the stress tests and the peer review ; - reminding that, concerning the matter of aircraft crashes, work had been carried out particularly in the Council of Ministers, thereby respecting shared competences on the nuclear security issue, between Member States and the Commission ; Amendement 1 Reference (new, 1 st indent) having regard to the European Council conclusions on 24-25 March 2011, in particular its demand to the European independent national authorities to conduct a comprehensive and transparent risk and safety assessment of the safety of all EU nuclear plants, in the light of lessons learned from the accident of the Fukushima-Daiichi NPP, in Japan ; In order to understand the scope and size of the stress tests exercise and the work-sharing between the various stakeholders who conducted them, it is important to bear in mind the European Council conclusions of March 2011, which had launched the exercise.
Amendement 2 Reference (new, 2 nd indent) - having regard to the ENSREG Report on the stress tests peer review adopted by ENSREG and the European Commission and on the associated joint statement provided by ENSREG and the European Commission on 26 April 2012 ; It is important to stress the essential role played by the European Nuclear Safety Regulator Group, which mainly carried out the work on the stress tests (operators reports analysis and peer review of national reports), and issued technical findings in its report on April 2012. Amendement 3 Reference (new, 3 rd indent) - having regard to the European Council conclusions on 28-29 June 2012, notably inviting Member States to ensure the full and timely implementation of the recommendations presented in the report from ENSREG further to the completion of the nuclear safety stress tests. In the same spirit as both previous amendments, European Council conclusions of June 2012, which took note of the ENSREG s report and invited Member States to rapidly implement these recommendations, should be mentioned. Amendement 4 Reference (original draft) Amended reference - having regards to the Council Directive 2009/71/Euratom of 25 June 2009 establishing a Community framework for the nuclear safety of nuclear installations, - having regards to the Council Directive 2009/71/Euratom of 25 June 2009 establishing a Community framework for the nuclear safety of nuclear installations, which underlines that National responsibility of Member States for the safety of nuclear installations is a fundamental principle, and that the primarily responsibility for supervising nuclear safety installations is the competency of national regulators ;
It is worth recalling that nuclear safety is a Member States competence, one principle expressed in the Convention on Nuclear Safety, and that the Directive on safety of nuclear installations is quite explicit about the fact that the control of nuclear facilities is of the strict responsibility of national nuclear safety authorities. Amendement 5 Paragraph 1 (original draft) Takes note of the Communication of the Commission on Stress Tests and their results; welcomes the effort undertaken by the Commission and ENSREG after the Fukushima accident to subject 145 reactors in the EU and 20 reactors outside the EU to a stress test procedure; emphasises the usefulness of this procedure and that this exercise has been unprecedented worldwide; expects that the results of the Stress tests will contribute to enhance the nuclear safety culture in Europe to become a leading example internationally; Takes note of the Communication of the Commission on Stress Tests and their results; welcomes the effort undertaken, after the Fukushima accident, by the regulators of the 27 Member States and the Commission and through ENSREG, to subject 145 reactors in the EU, and by the regulators of third countries to subject 20 reactors outside the EU, to a stress test procedure; emphasises the usefulness of this procedure and that this exercise has been unprecedented worldwide; expects that the results of the Stress tests will contribute to enhance the nuclear safety culture in Europe to become a leading example internationally; praises the effort to make the stress tests as transparent as possible, through the publication of all reports to the public and the organization of two meetings in Brussels, in 17 January and 8 May 2012, gathering all relevant stakeholders (NGOs, European nuclear industry, Regulators, Governments, etc), and through interventions at the European parliament ; It should be reminded that safety authorities first carried out the stress tests exercise. Furthermore, the efforts made on transparency level (notably towards the European Parliament) also deserve to be highlighted. Amendement 6 Paragraph 2 (original draft) Acknowledges that, following the Stress Tests, countries have started to implement or plan measures that will improve the safety of their plants; highlights that the peer review also identified measures to be considered at EU level; Acknowledges that, following the Stress Tests, countries have started to implement or plan measures to improve increase the safety margin of their plants, welcomes the fact that an Action plan was agreed between ENSREG
calls on all actors involved to give an appropriate and immediate follow-up to all the findings and recommendations contained therein, including identified best practices; and the Commission, for the follow up of the recommendations, and that all actions undertaken to improve nuclear safety margins following stress tests will be shared at the European level; highlights that the peer review also identified measures to be considered at EU level notably through a seminar organized by ENSREG at the beginning of 2013; calls on all actors involved to give an appropriate and timely and immediate follow-up to all the findings and recommendations contained therein, including identified best practices; ENSREG and the European Commission drew up an action plan, which deserves to be mentioned. Moreover, some measures should prove impossible to implement immediately ; taking recommendations into account will take time in certain cases, and safety authorities will address as a matter of priority what they feel is most important. It is therefore more appropriate to use the word timely instead of immediate. Amendement 7 Paragraph 3 (original draft) Reminds however that the Stress Tests initiated by the Commission and ENSREG were limited in scope and are primarily aimed to assess the robustness and preparedness of NPPs against severe external events; therefore the Stress Tests can not, and are not intending to, replace detailed safety reviews of nuclear power plants (NPP) which are carried out under national competence of the respective Member States and are primarily aimed to assess the robustness and preparedness of NPPs against severe external events; Reminds however that the Stress Tests initiated by the Commission and ENSREG were limited in scope and are primarily aimed to assess the robustness and preparedness of NPPs against extremely severe external events of the type faced at Fukushima; therefore the Stress Tests cannot, and are not intending to, replace the detailed safety reviews of nuclear power plants (NPP) which are already carried out under national competence of the respective Member States, and are primarily aimed to assess for assessing the robustness and preparedness nuclear safety of NPPs. against severe external events; Clarifications on the scope of the stress tests, to avoid any ambiguity on this point.
Amendement 8 Paragraph 5 (original draft) Urges the Commission and Member States to encourage non- EU countries with nuclear power facilities, in particular neighbouring countries, to apply the stress test procedure and to share their results; highlights the importance of strengthening the international nuclear safety standards and their proper implementation; believes that the EU should encourage a close cooperation at international level, in particular in the IAEA context in this regard; Urges the Commission and Member States to encourage non- EU countries with nuclear power facilities plants, in particular neighbouring countries, to apply the stress test procedure and to share their results; highlights the importance of strengthening the international nuclear safety standards and their proper implementation; believes encourage that the EU to keep on cooperating should encourage a close cooperation at international level, in particular in the IAEA context in this regard; The proposed amendment makes it possible to outline that the cooperation with IAEA is already intense and that the intention here is rather to strengthen it. Amendement 9 Paragraph 6 (original draft) Notes that the Convention on Nuclear Safety is an incentive instrument and obliges Parties to submit reports on the implementation of their obligations for "peer review" at meetings of the Parties to be held at the International Atomic Energy Agency ( IAEA.); Notes that the Convention on Nuclear Safety is an incentive legal instrument, aiming at promoting a high level of nuclear safety in the world ; notes that and obliges the CNS obliges all its contracting Parties (including EURATOM) to submit reports on the implementation of their obligations duties, for "peer review", at regular meetings of the said Parties to be held at under the auspices of the International Atomic Energy Agency ( IAEA); It should be reminded that the CNS is an instrument ensuing from international law. It should also be clarified in which framework, and under whose responsibility peer reviews are to be conducted. Amendement 10 Paragraph 7 (original draft) The hazards of radioactive waste disposal were again highlighted by the Fukushima nuclear The hazards of radioactive waste disposal were again highlighted by the Fukushima
accident; notes that similar accidents could occur in existing nuclear installations, or those under construction, in the Union and its neighbouring countries with high seismic and tsunami risk, such as Akkuyu (Turkey). The Union should take any appropriate measures to prevent radioactive waste disposal in identified high risk areas; urges neighbouring and accession candidate countries to join the European Community Urgent Radiological Information Exchange Agreement (ECURIE); nuclear accident; notes that similar accidents could occur in existing nuclear installations, or those under construction, in the Union and its neighbouring countries with high seismic and tsunami risk, such as Akkuyu (Turkey). Believes that, in addition to measures which will be implemented for NPPs, The Union should take any appropriate measures should be taken to prevent radioactive waste disposal to be sited in identified high risk areas; urges neighbouring and accession candidate countries to join the European Community Urgent Radiological Information Exchange Agreement (ECURIE); Actually, the Fukushima accident did not bring to light the issue of the disposal of nuclear waste. This does not preclude the need to guarantee the safety of such facilities in the future, therefore the second part of the amendment needs to be maintained. Amendement 11 Paragraph 8 (original draft) Calls on the EU Members States and national regulators to implement in their legislation the best identified practices; Calls on the EU Members States and national regulators to implement in their legislation the best identified practices the recommendations and suggestions of the ENSREG peer review report and, where appropriate, to adapt their legislation in order to take into account the lessons learned from the Fukushima-Daiichi accident ; Instead of mentioning the best practices, the ENSREG s recommendations should be referred to, since they are concrete. The question of how to take these recommendations into account may be subject to regulatory adjustments, but not necessarily. In addition, it should be noted that waiting for regulatory adjustments to be made might cause delays in the implementation of the recommendations. Hence, both approaches should be mentioned. Amendement 12 Paragraph 9 (original draft) Considers that there are different national approaches to assess the effects of aircraft crashes on the safety of NPPs; notes that "aircraft crashes have not been considered explicitly as an initiating event in the safety assessments" and that effects have been Considers that there are different national approaches to assess the effects of aircraft crashes on the safety of NPPs; notes that "aircraft crashes have not been considered explicitly as an initiating event in the safety assessments and that effects have been
outlined by the stress test specifications; regrets, however, that only four Member States have included such assessments into their stress test reports; asks the Commission to work together with ENSREG, Member States and NPP operators in order to anticipate and to agree a common approach to deal with the risk of aircraft crashes, while recognising that this risk falls under the national security concerns and sovereignty of Member States; outlined by the stress test specifications; regrets, however, that only four Member States have included such assessments into their stress test reports ; asks the Commission to work together with ENSREG, Member States and NPP operators in order to anticipate and to agree a common approach to deal with the risk of aircraft crashes, while recognising that this risk falls under the national security concerns and sovereignty of Member States; takes note, however, that the stress tests specifications mention that the assessment of consequences of loss of safety functions is relevant also if the situation is provoked by indirect initiating events for instance ( ) airplane crash ; takes note that, this risk falling largely under the national security concerns and sovereignty of Member States, an Ad-Hoc Group on Nuclear Security (AHGNS) was tasked to elaborate on that issue, and made public its conclusions; notes that further exchanges between Member states are planned on that subject within appropriate fora such as ENSRA (European Nuclear security regulators association); note that, in its Action Plan, ENSREG agreed that, should such additional follow-up activities be undertaken, to support them in the areas of its competence; The issue of aircraft crashes has not been ignored during the debates on the stress tests. However, the issue of the security of nuclear sites is neither the responsibility of the European Commission, nor of the nuclear safety authorities, but of the Member States. For this reason, a specific group was set up on these matters and had made recommendations. Even if no work has been carried out on this subject in the framework of the stress tests exercise, actions have nonetheless been conducted in adequate frameworks. Amendement 13 Paragraph 10 (original draft) Underlines that in the EU, 47 nuclear power plants with 111 reactors have more than 100 000 inhabitants living within 30 km, and regrets therefore that the scope of the stress tests was not extended to off-site emergency preparedness; welcomes the Commission initiative with ENSREG support, in launching a study into current arrangements, focussing on cross border regions in the EU and at making recommendations, including on off-site emergency preventive measures until end 2013, Underlines that in the EU, 47 nuclear power plants with 111 reactors have more than 100 000 inhabitants living within 30 km, and regrets therefore that the scope of the stress tests was not extended to off-site emergency preparedness; welcomes the ENSREG and Commission initiatives Commission initiative with ENSREG support, in launching a both improved guidance on mutual assistance between regulators on off-site emergency preparedness arrangements, and
and asks for results to be produced by the end of 2014; a study into current arrangements, focussing on cross border regions in the EU, and aiming at making recommendations, including on offsite emergency preventive measures until end 2013, and asks for results to be produced by the end of 2014; The question of off-site emergency preparedness was not included in the mandate given by the European Council; therefore it is not appropriate to suggest that any work has been accomplished. Instead, the perspective of further work to be soon carried out should be welcomed, as proposed in the paragraph. Amendement 14 Paragraph 11 (original draft) Underlines that the availability of a skilled and experienced workforce is key for a strong nuclear safety culture, regardless of whether a Member State will be phasing out, continuing or constructing NPPs; insists therefore that all necessary measures are implemented at EU and Member State level to promote and maintain sufficient levels of nuclear safety skills, such as waste management training; calls on the Commission to encourage cross-border exchange of experts and best practices; Underlines that the availability of a skilled and experienced workforce is key for a strong nuclear safety culture, regardless of whether a Member State will be phasing out, continuing or constructing NPPs; insists therefore that all necessary measures are implemented at EU and Member State level to promote and maintain sufficient levels of nuclear safety skills, such as on nuclear safety, waste management, radiation protection and emergency preparedness training; calls on the Commission to encourage cross-border exchange of experts and best practices; Training should not only encompass radioactive waste management, but also nuclear safety, radiation protection, emergency preparedness. Amendement 15 Paragraph 12 (original draft) Recommends that EU should support international efforts to develop higher safety standards; highlights, in this context, the EU's role in the Neighbourhood Policy as an instrument for nuclear safety; urges the Member States and the Commission to take joint responsibility for strengthening international Recommends that EU should support international efforts to develop higher safety standards; highlights, in this context, the EU's role in the Neighbourhood Policy as an instrument for cooperation on nuclear safety; urges the Member States and the Commission to take joint responsibility for strengthening
nuclear safety standards and their proper implementation, in close cooperation with the IAEA, the Espoo Convention secretariat and other relevant international organisations; invites the Commission to submit an inclusive action plan, with concrete arrangements for its implementation; urges the Commission and Member States, in cooperation with the IAEA, to work constructively with countries that failed to apply nuclear safety stress tests, such as Belarus and Russia, and urge them to adhere to international safety standards and cooperate with international experts during all stages of the preparation, construction, operation and decommissioning of nuclear power plants; believes that, in that connection, the EU should make full use of the expertise provided by international organisations and bodies; international nuclear safety standards and their proper implementation, in close cooperation with the IAEA, the Espoo Convention secretariat and other relevant international organisations; invites the Commission to submit support the IAEA post-fukushima action plan an inclusive action plan, with concrete arrangements for its implementation; urges the Commission and Member States, in cooperation with the IAEA, to work constructively with countries that failed to apply transparent nuclear safety stress tests, such as Belarus and Russia, and urge them to adhere to international safety standards and cooperate with international experts during all stages of the preparation, construction, operation and decommissioning of nuclear power plants; believes that, in that connection, the EU should make full use of the expertise provided by international organisations and bodies; An action plan agreed by ENSREG and the European Commission already exists, the roadmap for the implementation of the recommendations is therefore clear. On the international level, there is also an IAEA s action plan, strongly supported by the EU. Amendement 16 Paragraph 15 (texte d origine) Asks that the initial estimated total costs of necessary measures recommended from the stress tests for the 132 reactors operating in the EU ( 10 25 billion over the coming years) be further substantiated by a more detailed cost analysis carried out by the national regulators in cooperation with the nuclear operators, and if possible linked with the choice of identified recommendations; considers that such improvements must be supported by the nuclear operators and not by the taxpayer and asks the Commission to monitor this issue closely, including in the context of its competences in competition policy; Asks that the initial estimated total costs of necessary measures recommended from the stress tests for the 132 reactors operating in the EU ( 10 25 billion over the coming years) be further substantiated by a more detailed cost analysis carried out by the national regulators in cooperation with the nuclear operators, and if possible linked with the choice of identified recommendations; considers that such improvements must be supported by the nuclear operators and not by the taxpayer and asks the Commission to monitor this issue closely, including in the context of its competences in competition policy; The aim should be to encourage safety recommendations made by ENSREG following the stress tests exercise to be taken into account, not to evaluate their costs. Safety authorities impose the
implementation of safety measures to operators, irrespective of implementation costs, precisely to only consider the safety dimension. The costs of measures, which may vary depending of the country for a range of reasons, is a matter for operators, but not for the European Commission, nor for safety authorities. Amendement 17 Paragraph 16 (original draft) Highlights that an overall nuclear safety policy should encompass all nuclear sites, fuel and reactor safety, waste management and decommissioning, operational safety, sufficient human resources, continuous improvements in safety conditions for those working directly with nuclear materials, emergency preparedness, as well as guarantee independent and strong regulators; Highlights that an overall nuclear safety policy should encompass all nuclear sites, fuel and reactor safety, waste management and decommissioning, operational safety, sufficient human resources, continuous improvements in safety conditions for those working directly with nuclear materials, emergency preparedness, as well as guarantee of independent and strong regulators; Improvements in safety conditions should include all workers of the nuclear sector, not only those working with nuclear materials. Amendement 18 Paragraph 17 (original draft) Considers that as long as existing nuclear power stations remain in operation or are being constructed, the level of nuclear safety in EU as well as in neighbouring third countries should reflect as a main priority the highest safety standards; insists on the need to ensure that those concerns are reflected along the entire lifecycle of NPP, thus including their eventual decommissioning; Considers that as long as existing nuclear power stations plants remain in operation or are being constructed, the level of nuclear safety in EU as well as in neighbouring third countries should reflect as a main priority the highest safety standards; insists on the need to ensure that those concerns are reflected along the entire life-cycle time of NPP, thus including their eventual decommissioning; The key message is the requirement of a high safety level in Europe, along the entire life time of nuclear installations.
Amendement 19 Paragraph 19 (original draft) Notes that differences between Member States results in divergent approaches to nuclear safety regulation; Notes that differences between Member States may result in divergent approaches, but are all inspired by the IAEA nuclear safety standards and must respect the provisions of the safety directive adopted in 2009 to nuclear safety regulation; Although safety practices vary from one country to another, all Member States are members of the IAEA and parties to the Nuclear Safety Convention. As such, their safety requirements are derived from the IAEA standards, and their safety framework from provisions of the 2009 directive on safety of nuclear installations. Amendement 20 Paragraph 21 (original draft) Welcomes the upcoming revision of the Nuclear Safety Directive which provides the opportunity to introduce major improvements in areas such as safety procedures and frameworks, role, independence and means of nuclear regulatory authorities, openness and transparency, monitoring and verification; underlines that the revision of the nuclear safety legal framework should take into account ongoing international works such as at IAEA level; Welcomes the upcoming revision of the Nuclear Safety Directive which provides the opportunity to introduce major improvements in areas such as safety procedures and frameworks, role, independence and means of nuclear regulatory authorities, openness and transparency, monitoring and verification peer-reviews; underlines that the revision of the nuclear safety legal framework should take into account ongoing international works such as at IAEA level; Peer reviews are the adequate verification system. There already are provisions in the current safety directive, but they could actually be strengthened. Amendement 21 Paragraph 22 (original draft) Recognises the importance of implementing the recommendations and in assessing the extend to which the scope of the periodic safety review should be extended; restates the need for deep cross-border cooperation and exchange of best practices on these matters; Recognises the importance of implementing the recommendations in close cooperation with nuclear safety authorities and in assessing the extend to which the scope of the periodic safety review should be extended; restates the need
for deep cross-border cooperation and exchange of best practices on these matters; It is significant to maintain safety authorities, which, have the technical competence and the legitimacy to conduct this work at the core of the stress tests exercise and their monitoring. Amendement 22 Paragraph 23 (original draft) Welcomes the Commission's intention to propose legislation in the area of nuclear insurance and liability; asks in this context the Commission to come forward with such a proposal by end of 2013; Welcomes Takes note of the Commission's intention to propose legislative and non legislative instruments on in the area of nuclear insurance and liability; asks in this context the Commission to come forward with such a proposal by end of 2013; There already are international instruments on nuclear insurance and liability. Instead of welcoming Commission's intention to propose legislation in the area, one should rather take note of such an intention and see what will emerge from this process.