Brussels, 20/06/2012 (Agence Europe) - Conducting stress tests for nuclear power stations within the EU has attracted major criticism from the European Parliament. The final results are promised for the autumn.
ENSREG and the Commission came under criticism at a hearing at the European Parliament energy committee on Tuesday 19 June over the shortcomings of the stress tests of the nuclear power stations housing 143 reactors within 14 member states of the EU, carried out in the wake of the accident of the Fukushima Daiichi power station in Japan. Amongst other things, the MEPs criticised the insufficiency of the scenarios examined, which are limited to the risks presented by floods and earthquakes.
Invited to present the peer review report, the third and final phase of the stress tests exercise, on behalf of ENSREG, one of the heads of the French safety authority, Philippe Jamet, had to face criticism from the MEPs, which was particularly virulent from the Greens. “Why are the tests not carried out on a combination of factors?” asked French MEP Yannick Jadot. “Which are the power stations at the most risk? Have you worked on the problem of subcontracting?” added his compatriot, Michèle Rivasi. “What about the problems if you have to evacuate cities like Brussels or Paris? asked Germany's Rebecca Harms. A study carried out by independent experts at the request of the environmental NGO Greenpeace, which was published last week, criticises the shortcomings of the reports by the national experts and the Commission (see EUROPE 10634).
But the criticism did not just come from the ecologists. UK Liberal member Fiona Hall questioned matters relating to the intervention of rescue teams at remote power stations. From the S&D group, Lithuania's Zigmantas Balcytis deplored the fact that “many issues remain outstanding”, suggesting that a full assessment of all reactors be carried out, with specific conclusions. ENSREG was particularly rebuked over its failure to include aeroplane accidents in the tests. Commissioner Günther Oettinger wanted this issue to be included in the arrangements for the stress tests laid down in May 2011, but the member states refused to agree to it, leaving it up to an ad hoc group on nuclear safety within the Council to analyse the risks related to human factors (terrorist attacks, aeroplane crash) and the management of threats related to malevolent actions, in recommendations submitted on 6 June (see EUROPE 10628).
On Tuesday, the representative of ENSREG conceded that differences of opinion had come to light between the member states over the definition of risks from natural disaster, and acknowledged that not all countries had yet set in place the rules for confinement systems. However, he pledged that the recommendations arising from the peer review would require the presence of a secure building in each installation to shelter operators and allow them to take action on the ground, and would make it possible to deal with situations involving the total destruction of a plant or a series of accidents occurring at the same time across several power stations. Jamet also referred to ENSREG''s creation of an action plan to reinforce the robustness of the power stations. In France, which is home to 58 reactors, the investment would be between €100 and €200 million per power station.
Commissioner Oettinger has promised proposals on revised safety rules for October, which will focus on three areas: the governance and independence of the authorities, the selection of technical criteria and improved transparency. “The Commission wants to be able to respond to all of the citizens' concerns on the safety of nuclear installations within the EU”, he stated. (EH/transl.fl)