18 Amendments of Kathleen VAN BREMPT related to 2013/0340(NLE)
Amendment 32 #
Draft legislative resolution
Citation 2
Citation 2
– having regard to Articles 31 and 32 of the Euratom Treaty, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C7- 0385/2013)the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 191 and 192 thereof,
Amendment 33 #
Proposal for a directive
Title 1
Title 1
Proposal for a COUNCIL DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL amending Directive 2009/71/EURATOM establishing a Community framework for the nuclear safety of nuclear installations
Amendment 35 #
Proposal for a directive
Citation 1
Citation 1
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Communityon the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 3191 and 3192 thereof,
Amendment 37 #
Proposal for a directive
Citation 2
Citation 2
Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission, drawn up after obtaining the opinion of a group of persons appointed by the Scientific and Technical Committee from among scientific experts in the Member States,
Amendment 43 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 1 a (new)
Recital 1 a (new)
(1a) Nuclear power is an energy source and the Union and the Member States should treat nuclear energy on the same basis as other energy sources under the Treaty on the functioning of the European Union.
Amendment 47 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8 a (new)
Recital 8 a (new)
(8a) Reminds that the Fukushima disaster again made painfully clear that there is no such thing as a zero risk nuclear plant; therefore there is no way to prevent with certainty severe accidents happening in the future within or outside the borders of the Union.
Amendment 50 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9 a (new)
Recital 9 a (new)
(9a) Emphasizes that the stress tests only cover the assessment of specific previously agreed risks and that risks such as secondary events, material deterioration, human errors, specific flaws inside the reactor vessels and many others were not taken in to account, therefore underlines that even succeeding for the stress tests does not guarantee the safety of a nuclear plant;
Amendment 51 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9 b (new)
Recital 9 b (new)
(9b) Stresses that when the results of the stress tests are not followed by appropriate measures, they lose most of their value; reminds however that the decision on whether to act upon negative results from the stress tests or not, lies solely and entirely with the Member States; if they base their analysis on other elements than solely reaching the maximum achievable safety when deciding on which actions to take, the beneficial objective of the stress tests shall be undermined;
Amendment 54 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) When undertaking infrastructure projects that could affect the nuclear safety of nuclear installations, the appropriate national and European mechanisms of consultation with national regulatory authorities, independent international experts and the public should be in place and full account should be taken of the opinions expressed by them.
Amendment 55 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) The consequences of a nuclear accident can go beyond national borders, therefore close cooperation, coordination and information exchange between regulatory authorities of neighbouring countries or of countries in the same region, irrespective of whether they operate nuclear installations or not, need to be encouraobliged. In this respect, Member States should ensure that appropriate arrangements are in place to facilitate such cooperation on nuclear safety matters with cross-border impacts, including with third countries. Synergies should be sought with the Union Civil Protection Mechanism41 which provides an EU framework for cooperation between the Member States in the field of civil protection in improving the effectiveness of systems for preventing, preparing for and responding to natural and man-made disasters. __________________ 41 Commission proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on a Union Civil Protection Mechanism (COM/2011/934 final).
Amendment 64 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) Ageing of the safety related structures, systems and components of a nuclear installation, and especially embrittlement of components which are difficult to replace in practice, such as reactor pressure vessels, puts a natural limit to its acceptable continued operation. From both a safety and an economical point of view, the limit of operational lifetime is typically 40 years after the start of commercial operation therefore Member States should ensure that possible lifetime extension of existing nuclear power plants does not expose the workers and the public to additional risks. To this end, Directive 2009/71/Euratom should be amended to include new Community wide safety objectives to be complied with by the regulatory authorities and the licence holders in case of a lifetime extension of existing nuclear power plants.; in case of a request for a lifetime extension, the nuclear installation should comply with the same safety requirements as the safety requirements stipulated for new nuclear installations; moreover, an overall maximum lifetime for nuclear installations should be established which should be applied in all Member States to ensure a higher safety level, create uniformity in the Member States and help provide a structured overview of the phase out of nuclear plants;
Amendment 66 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) For new reactor design, there is a clear expectation to address in the original design what was beyond design for previous generations of reactors. Design extension conditions are accident conditions that are not considered for design basis accidents, but are considered in the design process of the installation in accordance with best estimate methodology, and for which releases of radioactive material are kept within acceptable limits. Design extension conditions cshould include severe accident conditions.
Amendment 70 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) After the nuclear accidents at Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, the Fukushima nuclear accident highlighted once again the critical importance of the containment function, which is the last barrier to protect people and the environment against radioactive releases resulting from an accident. Therefore the applicant for a licence for the construction of a new power or research reactor should demonstrate that the design practically limits the effects of a reactor core damage to within the containment, i.e. he has to prove that a radioactive release outside the containment is physically impossible or can be considered extremely unlikely with a high degree of confidence for such release to occur.
Amendment 112 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Directive 2009/71 Euratom
Article 5 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The competent regulatory authority shall be a member of an independent and autonomous European umbrella organisation for safety and control that needs to be set-up, the sole objective of which is to secure overall safety. The umbrella organisation shall be composed of independent and technically suited experts and receive sufficient competences and powers to create measures or perform actions that guarantee the highest nuclear safety achievable in the Union.
Amendment 114 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Directive 2009/71 EURATOM
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) to require the licence holder to comply with national nuclear safety requirements and the terms of the relevant licence; if the licence holder were not to comply with the safety requirement, the regulatory authority has the possibility to make the licence holder to cease his activities;
Amendment 117 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point a
Directive 2009/71/Euratom
Article 6 – paragraph1
Article 6 – paragraph1
1. Member States shall ensure that the national framework requires that the primsole responsibility for the nuclear safety of a nuclear installation rests with the licence holder. This responsibility cannot be delegated. Nuclear operators and waste licensees shall be fully insured and all insurance costs as well as liabilities and costs for damage caused to people and the environment in the case of accidents, shall be fully covered by the operators and licensees.
Amendment 120 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point b
Directive 2009/71/Euratom
Article 6– paragraph 2
Article 6– paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that the national framework requires licence holders, under the supervision of the competent regulatory authority, to regularly assess and verify, and continuously improve, as far as reasonably achievable, the nuclear safety of their nuclear installations in a systematic and verifiable manner.
Amendment 144 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Directive 2009/71/Euratom
Article 8 b – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 8 b – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) sited so that due consideration is provided to avoid, where possible, external natural and man-made hazards and minimise their impact;