/dash HastheCommissionassessedorwillitassesswhatlessonscanbelearnedfromtheaccidentonthe
roleoftheregulatoranditsrelationshipwiththenuclearindustry?DidtheCommissionmakeanyrecommendations for a clear division of tasks in terms of nuclear safety, civil protection andindependenceoftheregulatorduringthenuclearpartofthenegotiations?
/dash Theaccidentoccurredduringthecleaningof30uraniumfuelassembliesusingequipmentsuppliedby
FramatomeANP.HastheCommissionrequestedinformationfromFramatomeastowhatlessonsithaslearnedfromtheaccidentanditsimpactonsimilarproceduresinMemberStates?
/dash Has the Commission requested any independent monitoring of the environmental impact of the
releaseofradioactivematerialduringtheaccident?
AnswergivenbyMrsdePalacioonbehalfoftheCommission
(9September2003)
TheInternationalAtomicEnergyAgency(AIEA)undertookanexpertreviewmissiontoinvestigatethe
10April2003fuel-cleaningincidentatthePaksnuclearpowerplant.Theteamwascomposedofnuclearand radiation safety experts fromthe IAEA, three Member States (Austria, Finland, United Kingdom),Canada, Slovakia and the United States of America. The mission started on 10June 2003 and wascompletedby25June2003.TheCommissionwasnotpartofthemission.
ThedraftofthefindingsofthemissionandtheirrecommendationshasbeengiventotheHungarian
AtomicEnergyAuthorityinvitingfactualcomments.ThefinalreportbythemissionwasduetobehandedtotheHungarianGovernment.TheHungarianGovernmentintendstomakethefinalreportavailabletothepublic.
Onthebasisofthecurrentacquis,theCommissionisnotformallycalledupontoassesslessonslearned
fromsuchincidentsinnuclearplants/dasheitherinsideoroutsidetheUnion.However,oncethereportoftheIAEAmissionisavailableitwillbecarefullyexaminedbytheCommissiontoassesswhatlessonscouldbelearnedfromtheincidentandtherolesofthedifferentpartiesinvolved.Ifitwouldbeusefultoholdbilateraldiscussionsonthesubjectwithanyoftheparties,theCommissionwillseektodoso.
Concerningreleaseofradioactivematerial,initsreportonnuclearsafetytotheCouncil,theHungarian
Governmentgavedetailsoftheairborneradioactivityonthedayoftheincidentandforthefollowing16days.InitsPressReleaseonitsmission,theIAEAnotedthat,concerningradiationprotection,theyagreedwiththePaksandHungarianregulatoryauthority’sassessmentthattheannualdoselimitsforthegeneralpublichadnotbeenexceededasaresultofthesereleases.
(2004/C58E/174) WRITTENQUESTIONE-2355/03
byProinsiasDeRossa(PSE)totheCommission
(16July2003)
Subject:Publicawarenessofnaturalandman-madehazards
On5February2003,theCommissionissuedaworkingdocument,‘Improvementofpublicawarenessand
safetyinthefaceofnaturalandman-madehazards’,forameetingofinterestedstakeholdersinthisissueon28February2003.
On 7May 2003,the Commissionissued a listofcontributions it had received fromMember States,
regionalandlocalauthorities,accessioncountries,NGOsandotherinstitutionsbytheendofApril2003inresponsetoitsworkingdocument.6.3.2004EN C58E/161 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion
Could the Commission indicate what representatives the Irish Government sent to the 28February
meeting,indicatewhetherithasreceivedaformalcontributionfromtheIrishGovernmentinresponsetoitsworkingdocument,andindicatewhenitintendscomingforwardwiththeCommunicationonthissubjectreferredtoinitsworkingdocument?
AnswergivenbyMrsWallströmonbehalfoftheCommission
(10September2003)
Followingthemeetingof28February2003,theCommissiondidindeedassemblethecontributionsithad
receivedandcompilealistofthosewhoattendedthemeeting.
Boththelistandthecontributionshavebeenpostedonthewebsitegivenovertotheinitiative(http://
www.europa.eu.int/comm/environment/civil/prote/consultation_en.htm).AsregardsIreland,MrJohnCrim-minsfromtheOfficeofPublicWorkswasregisteredamongtheparticipants,andhisdetailsareavailable
onthesite.However,theCommissionreceivednoofficialcontributionfromIreland.
Inadditiontotheconsultationprocess,theDirectors-GeneralforCivilProtectionoftheMemberStates,the
accessioncountriesandthecountriesintheEuropeanEconomicAreawerespecificallyconsultedatameetingheldonKos(Greece)atthebeginningofMay2003.
Followingthatmeeting,andhavingexaminedthecontributionsitreceived,theCommissionwillprobably
adoptthecommunicationannouncedintheworkingdocumentduringSeptember2003.
(2004/C58E/175) WRITTENQUESTIONE-2366/03
bySalvadorGarrigaPolledo(PPE-DE)totheCommission
(17July2003)
Subject:ExistingscopeoftheIberoekabusinesscooperationprogramme
InparalleltotheEurekaprogramme,forjointprojectswithundertakingsfromLatinAmericancountries,
theIberoekaprogrammehasbeensetupasasupportinstrumentfortechnologicalcooperationwiththe
samegroupofcountries.
Under this programme, a project meeting the requirements may obtain certification as an ‘Iberoeka
project’.Thiscertificationisa‘qualitylabel’fortheproject,guaranteeingitpreferentialfunding.
Can the Commission provide information on its evaluation thus far of the results of the Iberoeka
programme?Canitalsoindicatehowitseestheprogramme’sfutureandidentifythemostsalientaspects
ofitsresults?
AnswergivenbyMrBusquinonbehalfoftheCommission
(10September2003)
Iberoekaisaself-standingcooperationschemewithnostructurallinkstoEureka.
Iberoekaisaten-yearoldinitiativefromSpainandPortugalandtheirLatinAmericanpartners,inthe
contextoftheIbero-AmericanProgrammeofScienceandTechnologyforDevelopment(CYTED).ItsmainobjectiveistoincreasetheproductivityandcompetitivenessofnationalindustriesandeconomiesinIbero-Americancountriesthroughclosecooperationbetweencompaniesandresearchcentresinthefieldofscientificresearch,technologicaldevelopmentandinnovation.C58E/162 EN6.3.2004 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion