sou · GZB318 · 2011-03-02 00:00:00 — A further advantage of having a single overall licensing procedure under the Environmental Code instead of dealing with applications under the Nuclear Operations Act, is that it would embrace the right of public attendance, as expressed in Chapter 2, Article 11, second paragraph of the and in Chapter 5, Section 1, first paragraph of the Swedish Code of Judicial Procedure. It follows from these provisions that court proceedings are to be open to the public as a general rule. Thus the Environment Court would deal with cases concerning environmentally hazardous activities at a main hearing to which the general public has access. Referral bodies sometimes attend these proceedings and are required to answer questions put to them by the court. Certain NGOs are entitled to appeal against rulings and decisions. Under the present Nuclear Operations Act or the Radiation Protection Act, licensing applications are prepared and examined by means of a written procedure that does not offer the same general public access as a main hearing in the Environment Court. If the rules are harmonised in the Environmental Code, the Government would be able to focus on assessing the permissibility of major new facilities pursuant to Chapter 17 of the Code, instead of engaging in technical deliberations on safety and radiation protection, aspects that are better dealt with by the Radiation Safety Authority. An important legal consideration in this respect is that harmonised rules would make it easier for a party to appeal against supervisory decisions taken by that agency. Certain matters in the Nuclear Operations Act, however, may be difficult to fit into the Environmental Code since to some extent they have a different purpose. Certain special rules may therefore be required in respect of issues concerning the non- proliferation of nuclear weapons. In considering where in the Environmental Code the provisions on nuclear safety and radiation protection might best be placed, the Committee has found that several of the substantive provisions in Chapter 12, Quarries, agriculture and other activities, have been abolished and that the chapter now contains very few paragraphs. These provisions can, without changing their substantive content, usefully be moved to Chapter 7, Protection of areas, and Chapter 9, Environmentally hazardous activities and health protection. In sum, as a result of the Committees deliberations, it is proposed that the current Chapter 12 be deleted, to be replaced by substantive rules concerning nuclear safety and radiation protection under a new heading, Nuclear safety. It is further proposed that these provisions apply to both ionising and non- ionising radiation and be collectively designated practices involving radiation. Under this proposal, the term practices involving radiation is given the same legislative scope as it possesses today under the Nuclear Operations Act and the Radiation Protection Act. Radiation safety – a collective term encapsulating the purpose of a harmonised law Coherent legislation on radiation safety must clearly define what the terms it employs refer to in various connections. use terminology that enables it to communicate smoothly with the outside world in the contexts of both international cooperation on policy matters and development aid provision. At the same time, a collective, unifying term is needed for the various purposes that coherent legislation is intended to embrace. The Radiation Safety Inquiry contends that radiation safety is such a term. proposes that the term nuclear safety be used as a collective designation for a)radiation protection: the protection of people and the environment against the harmful effects of radiation, through justification of use, optimisation of protective measures and the limitation of radiation doses and exposure risks, b)safety: protection against the harmful effects of radiation by taking whatever steps are necessary to prevent defects in equipment, equipment failure, wrong handling or other circumstances that may lead to accidents, and to facilitate the combating of breakdowns and the limitation or delay of emissions should an accident nevertheless occur, c)physical protection: protection of operations, facilities and equipment against incursions, unauthorised use, theft, sabotage or other action liable to cause harm through radiation. d)non-proliferation: measures designed to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons at both national and international level, and measures to verify that such proliferation is not occurring. proposes that the term practices involving radiation be used as a collective designation for a)nuclear operations involving the erection, possession or operation of -a facility that is or has been intended to accommodate a regulated nuclear chain reaction (nuclear reactor), -a facility in which processes involving ionising radiation occur (spallation or other similar process), where the content of the radioactive substances generated requires cooling, -a facility for mining or extracting material containing uranium or other substances with fissile or fertile properties that can be used for the production of fuel for facilities intended to accommodate a regulated chain reaction of nuclear processes (nuclear fuel), -a facility for the management or processing of radioactive substances, -a permanent deposition facility (final disposal repository) or other accumulation (storage) of radioactive waste. b)other practices involving radiation relating to -the possession, acquisition, sale, letting or conveyance of radioactive substances or technical appliances capable of generating radiation, -the import or introduction into of radioactive substances or technical appliances capable of generating radiation, -the export or exportation from of non-nuclear radioactive substances or technical appliances capable of generating radiation, -the transportation or transit through of radioactive substances, -the use of technical appliances capable of generating radiation, -the use of technical appliances containing a radioactive substance. Mandatory licensing, notification and approval In view of the close links between the rules in the Environmental Code, the Nuclear Operations Act and the Radiation Protection Act respectively, the Committee has proposed that the provisions concerning nuclear safety and radiation safety be merged in Chapter 12 of the Environmental Code under the heading Radiation safety. It is further proposed that these provisions apply to both ionising and non-ionising radiation and be collectively designated practices involving radiation. Scope of the licensing requirement A basic principle should be that all practices involving radiation require a licence under the Environmental Code. In light of the special nature of practices involving ionising radiation – which is particularly evident where nuclear power reactors or a final repository for spent nuclear fuel are concerned – the Committee proposes that the licensing requirement be stated directly in the text of the legal provisions in Chapter 12. The licensing, approval or notification requirement should apply as soon as work is initiated, i.e. when a facility is erected or when some other practice involving radiation is engaged in. In the case of practices involving non-ionising radiation, conditions are fundamentally different. Non-ionising radiation is the type that surrounds us all in our everyday lives, i.e. all visible radiation, ultraviolet radiation, infrared radiation and radio waves and microwaves, and the low-frequency and static fields that are found for instance around power lines and electrical appliances. In light of this, the Committee proposes that the Government be required to prescribe which practices involving non-ionising radiation may not be engaged in without a licence. At present, certain practices involving lasers and solariums require licensing or notification to the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority. Government assessments of permissibility If substantive radiation safety provisions are introduced into Chapter 12 of the Environmental Code, and the Nuclear Operations Act thereby no longer applies, the kinds of facilities and activities that will require government approval via permissibility assessments in accordance with Chapter 17, Section 1 of the Environmental Code should be clearly specified so that small-scale facilities which have hitherto been kept out of the assessment process are not brought into it. proposes that the following facilities be required to undergo permissibility assessments: 1.Facilities in which a controllable chain reaction of nuclear processes can be maintained (nuclear power reactors, research reactors and other reactors of a similar type), 2.Facilities in which processes with ionising radiation occur (spallation or other similar processes) and where the content of the radioactive substances which occur during the process needs cooling, 3.Facilities for the mining or extraction of uranium-bearing material or other compounds/substances that can be used for the production of fuel for the facilities listed in point 1 (nuclear fuel), 4.Facilities for the management or processing of enriched uranium or of a compound of which such uranium is a part and which contains more than 20 per cent or more of the isotope 235 and where the total amount does not exceed 5 kilograms 5.Facilities where more than or more of the isotope 233 in pure form or as part of a compound is managed or processed, 6.Facilities where more than 2 kilograms of plutonium in pure form or as part of a compound is managed or processed, 7.Facilities for the final disposal or interim storage of nuclear material, radioactive waste, spent nuclear fuel or other radioactive substances where the estimated total amount of radioactive substances exceeds 10 terabecquerel (TBq), of which a maximum 10 gigabecquerel (GBq) comprises alpha substances, Given the above specification, the proposed new regulation will cover the same types of facilities as the present one. From a business, energy, employment, climate and regional policy viewpoint, raising the thermal output ceiling in an existing nuclear power reactor may be equated with replacing an existing reactor with a new one. In light of this, the Committee proposes the insertion of a new paragraph in Section 1 stipulating that such an increase in output necessitates a permissibility assessment on the part of the Government. In the Committees view, the licensing procedure should be adapted to the hazard potential involved and to the need for special skills on the part of the operator. It is reasonable to expect the Environment Court to focus its efforts on assessing large facilities and issues of fundamental importance. proposes therefore that the courts consider applications for the erection, possession and operation of large new facilities engaging in practices involving ionising radiation, for the decommissioning of such facilities, for both output increases in existing nuclear power reactors and for exemption from the obligations that parties engaging in practices involving radiation are normally required to meet, and for changes in ownership of a facility. Less complicated matters could usefully be settled through adjudication by the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority. This would release the Environment Court from such duties while at the same time strengthening the role of the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority as an expert body. Examples of licensing cases that, under the Committee proposals, might well be dealt with by the agency include licence renewals for certain large facilities and applications for the interim storage or final disposal of radioactive waste from abroad. At present, under the Nuclear Operations Act, such applications are considered by the Government. In addition, the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority deals with numerous licence applications in the radiation safety field, including the possession and use etc of small amounts of nuclear material, radiation sources, X-ray equipment and strong lasers, and the transportation of nuclear material and radioactive waste. Other relevant environmental consequences of an activity – such as noise, vibration and discharges of waste water – that may come up in connection with the review of a practice involving radiation will continue to be dealt with by the county administrative boards environmental review committees, as before. Licensing procedure for facilities engaging in practices involving radiation Preparation of nuclear safety issues prior to permissibility assessments by the Government proposes that the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority be required to prepare applications due for permissibility assessment by the Government, in parallel with and in collaboration with the environment court concerned. The agencys assessment is to focus on radiation safety issues associated with the activity. In considering the matter, the agency is also to propose conditions involving a step-by-step assessment of the facilitys erection process. The question of best available technology in various connections – in terms of safety and radiation protection – is to be specified at each step along the way. proposes the introduction of a new paragraph into the Environmental Code – Chapter 19, Article 1a – stipulating that the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority be required to examine the nuclear safety aspect in preparing the Governments permissibility assessment of new facilities for the pursuit of practices involving radiation, and also be required to state its own opinion in turning over the matter to the Government for final consideration. In expressing its opinion to the Government, the agency can propose conditions involving step-by-step assessment of the facilitys erection process, with the question of best available technology in terms of safety and radiation protection being specified at each step along the way. The Swedish Radiation Safety Authority is to focus in its preparatory work on the radiation safety aspects of the operation. To enable the agency to prepare such cases, the Committee proposes that a new rule be added to Chapter 2, Section 4 of the Environmental Code specifying that in matters concerning radiation safety the Environment Court will be required to send both the announcement and the application documents not only to the and certain other agencies but also to the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority. Content of applications in licensing cases further proposes that a be added to Chapter 22, Section 1 of the Environmental Code setting out special provisions for cases concerning practices involving radiation. These provisions are to tie in with the safety provisions concerning such practices described in Chapter 12 of the Code. Thus the Committee proposes that in cases concerning practices involving radiation submitted to the Environment Court for consideration, applications must also include: 1.a preliminary safety report in accordance with regulations issued by the Government, 2.an account of how the provisions in Chapter 12, Section 26 concerning economic, administrative and staff resources have been met, and 3.an account of how proximity to another operation may affect safety in the facility for which the application is being made. to plead in licensing cases under the Environmental Code The Environment Court, in commenting on the Committees interim report (Nuclear : New Reactors and Increased Liability), has proposed that the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority when necessary be granted the right to plead in court in respect of cases affecting the agencys sphere of responsibility. shares this view and proposes that a new rule be added to Chapter 22, Section 6 of the Environmental Code stating that the Radiation Safety Authority may represent the public interest regarding radioactive safety and may be accorded the status of a party in court in representing such interest. The Radiation Safety Authority may also present motions in court and appeal against court decisions. The Environment Court has also proposed that to enable it to represent the public interest in matters concerning radiation protection, the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority should be granted the right to apply for the review of permits, of exemptions or of approvals previously granted under the Code. shares the courts view on this point, too, and recommends that Chapter 24, Section 7 be supplemented as the This paragraph specifies the conditions under which matters concerning the review or withdrawal of a permit or concerning injunctions against continued operations may be heard. The Environment Court may not raise matters on its own initiative; under the provision, only certain agencies have the right to plead in court. The first paragraph of the section specifies that this applies to the , the Swedish Legal, Financial and , the county administrative board concerned and the municipality that has taken over supervisory responsibility in cases specified there. Thus the Committee proposes that the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority be added to the list of agencies. Conditions of importance for radiation safety As regards any conditions relating to radiation safety issues that may be appropriate following the Governments assessment of permissibility, the Committee takes the view that the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority as an expert body is best qualified to issue them. In light of this, the Committee proposes that a new rule be added to Chapter 22, Section 25 of the Environmental Code stating that in cases concerning radiation safety as described in Chapter 12, the Environment Court is to delegate responsibility for establishing conditions of importance for radiation safety to the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority. In addition, the Committee proposes that a reference to its proposals under Chapter 12, Sections 15–16 be inserted into this section. Under these provisions, the Government is required to issue regulations to the effect that permission or approval as prescribed in this Chapter is to be subject to the conditions necessary to ensure compliance with 1.the responsibilities and obligations that follow from the Act on Liability and Compensation in the Event of Radiological Accidents, and 2.the requirements concerning the supply of ores, source materials and special fissile materials that follow from the provisions in the treaty of 25 1957 on the of Atomic Energy Community. In addition, under the Committees proposals, the Government is to issue regulations to the effect that the agency it appoints is given the task of stipulating the conditions needed for radiation safety purposes during the licence permits period of validity. These conditions may not, however, involve any alteration of the conditions issued by the Environment Court. The Committees proposals in relation to current regulations Diagrammatically, the present application process for the erection of new facilities for nuclear activities under the Environmental Code and the Nuclear Operations Act is as follows: In sum, the Committees proposals for a single harmonised application process mean simplifying the rules in relation to those currently found in the Environmental Code and the Nuclear Operations Act. In principle, however, the process itself will differ from the present one. The Committees proposals for incorporating the substantive rules in the Radiation Protection Act and the Nuclear Operations Act into the Environmental Code will mean that -the Nuclear Operations Act and the Radiation Protection Act will cease to apply, which in turn means the Government will no longer be required to assess permit applications as at present, -applicants need only draw up a permit application for submission to the Environment Court, -the Governments permissibility assessments and the Environment Court licence assessments will only cover major new facilities where nuclear operations are planned, unless the Government decides in certain individual cases that other facilities also require a permissibility assessment, -the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority is empowered to examine the radiation safety aspects in preparing the Governments permissibility assessment, -the Governments decision on permissibility will be binding on the Environment Court, as is currently the case, -the Swedish Radiation Safety Authoritys powers under the Environmental Code will be strengthened, e.g. in that the agency will be able to plead in court when application cases are dealt with under the Code, -the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority will be empowered to stipulate the conditions under which permission may be granted in cases that have a bearing on nuclear safety, -the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority will, to a greater extent than at present, consider permit applications for facilities of a less hazardous nature. In brief, the revised process for dealing with applications for new nuclear facilities may be described as follows: Prepares a permit application in accordance with the Environmental Code and submits it to the relevant environment court Sends a copy of the application both to the Radiation Safety Authority and to other agencies in accordance with the Environmental Code The Swedish Radiation Safety Authority Reviews the nuclear safety aspects Submits a statement of opinion to the environment court, the municipal council and the Government. Reviews in accordance with the Environmental Code, holds the main hearing Considers the matter in accordance with the Environmental Code Sends its statement of opinion to the Government Approves or rejects the operations Grants permits under the Environmental Code Holds new main hearing Grants permits and stipulates conditions pursuant to the Environmental Code. delegate responsibility for stipulating safety conditions to the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority The Swedish Radiation Safety Authority Stipulates the conditions and announces them in stages Recycling and reuse in respect of radioactive waste The Environmental Code incorporates legally binding principles and general rules of consideration. Anyone pursuing an activity under the Code is required for instance to conserve raw materials and energy and to reuse and recycle them wherever possible, i.e. to respect both the resource management principle and the ecocycle principle. The resource management principle implies that all activities are to be pursued and all measures taken in such a way that raw materials and energy are used as efficiently as possible. The ecocycle principle implies that materials sustainably extracted from nature are used, reused, recycled and disposed of with the least possible usage of resources and without detriment to the natural environment. Alternatively, this principle might be described as the pursuit of circular or closed flows of materials. cannot see any sound reason why the principles of sound management and natural cycles should not be fully applied in the case of radioactive waste, since there is nothing specific to suggest that this might have an adverse effect on human health or the human environment. This is particularly true of low- level radioactive waste deposited in ground facilities at nuclear power stations and at the Studsvik research plant. Incineration as a means of reducing waste volumes may also be a desirable development. From a safety viewpoint, on the other hand, and in view of the proliferation risk, questions have been raised about the advisability of exploiting what energy remains in spent nuclear fuel through processing.