WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1489/98 by Hiltrud BREYER to the Commission. Mochovce
Date: 1998-05-13
Institutions: BREYER, European Parliament
Subjects: Slovakia, civil defence, degree of pollution, health risk, nuclear power station, nuclear safety, public awareness campaign, radioactive pollution, radioactivity

C 354/102

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

19. 11. 98

The same  people are  currently  trying engineer  a fait  accompli by bringing the first section of the Mochovce
nuclear power station into operation in the summer, before the parliamentary elections, without carrying out the
minimum prescribed adaptation measures.

What  ways  of  intervening  are  open  to  the  Commission?  The  building  of  the  installation  was,  after  all,  only
possible in the first place with the help of German and French loans (from the Kreditanstalt fu¤r Wiederaufbau and
the Socie·te· Ge·ne·rale) and guarantees from Hermes in Germany and Coface in France.

Is the Commission aware that in the case of the Greiswald nuclear power station, which was built in the same way
using Soviet technology, more than 200 safety enhancement measures were prescribed by the Gesellschaft fu¤r
Reaktorschutz (GRS › Reactor Protection Company), and that this catalogue of measures was reduced to 87 in
the case of Mochovce? By the end of November 1997 only 24 of these had been implemented. In the negotiations
between the Skoda executive, whose past was referred to above, the management of the Praha energy project and
representatives of the Slovakian electric power company it has now been decided to dispense with a further series
of safety measures in order to bring the power station into operation before the parliamentary elections. Can the
Commission approve these actions?

(98/C 354/162)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1489/98

by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission

(13 May 1998)

Subject: Mochovce

Is  the  Commission  aware  that  the  radioactive  contamination,  by  a-nuclides  in  particular,  released  into  the
environment  following  the  second  accident  in  1977  has  still  not  been  completely  eliminated,  and  that  the
population has not been informed of its extent? Mud from the contaminated river bed and banks, for example, has
been used as garden fertilizer. What measures are proposed to inform and protect the population?

(98/C 354/163)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1490/98

by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission

(13 May 1998)

Subject: Mochovce

Is the Commission aware that the work of decontaminating the reactor room being carried out by the British firm
AEA-Technology was broken off in June 1996 before the contamination present since 1991 in the foundation and
under  ground  or  the  high  level  of  radioactive  contamination  in  parts  of  the  installation  had  been  anything
approaching eliminated? What were the reasons for this action?

(98/C 354/164)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1491/98

by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission

(13 May 1998)

Subject: Mochovce

Is the Commission aware that the A1 block of the nuclear power station in Jaslovske Bouhunice, Slovakia, which
was damaged in an accident in 1976 and again, irreparably, in 1977, still exists and that a nuclear volume of circa
20 tonnes of non-manipulable fuel elements resulting from these accidents is still present on the site?

Is the Commission also aware that other objects touched during clearance and storage of damaged material show
significant safety deficiencies or are seriously contaminated, resulting in continuous radioactive contamination
of the soil and ground water?