WRITTEN QUESTION P-3083/01 by Marialiese Flemming (PPE-DE) to the Commission. European safety standards and protective measures for nuclear power stations.
Date: 2001-10-30
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EAEC Treaty, EU Member State, enlargement of the Union, nuclear law, nuclear power station, nuclear safety, safety standard

C 147 E/92

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

20.6.2002

(2002/C 147 E/097)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3080/01

by Sérgio Marques (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(13 November 2001)

Subject: Nuclear fusion under the Sixth Framework Programme

The Commission organised an informal meeting of Science and Technology Ministers on 19 January 2001
to discuss a paper on the future strategy for the European Fusion Programme. In accordance with the
Ministers’ majority view the Commission drew up a proposal for a Euratom programme for the Sixth
Framework Programme, in which the construction of ITER is the first priority for the Fusion Programme.

Since the paper presented by the Commission at the meeting of 19 January states that the European
Fusion Programme needs an allocation of EUR 850 million for options 3 and 4 (which envisage an
immediate start on the construction of ITER) and bearing in mind that the Commission’s proposal for the
Sixth Framework Programme suggests a budget of EUR 700 million, can the Commission say:

1. why the budget has been cut by EUR 150 m;

2. whether it considers that this cut, combined with the fact that EUR 200 m are earmarked for the
construction of ITER, will create problems for the success of the research essential for the operation of
ITER and jeopardise the European Union’s position as world leader in research into alternative
energies?

Answer given by Mr Busquin on behalf of the Commission

(21 December 2001)

In its proposal concerning the Sixth Euratom Framework Programme, the Commission confirmed the
‘reactor’ orientation of fusion energy research. In order to step up coordination in the framework of the
European Research Area, the Commission proposes to concentrate Community resources on joint projects
such as the ITER project, if it is decided to build it, or the use of JET.

The political agreement reached in the Research Council on 10 December 2001, bringing to € 750 million
the financial amount for fusion for the period 2002-2006, will make it possible to achieve these objectives
without calling into question the EU’s role with regard to fusion. The Commission considers that the
Member States should bear a larger proportion of the costs of the activities specific to the national fusion
associations which are less integrated than the activities at European level.

Depending on the timetable for the completion of ITER, part of the € 200 million earmarked for this
project in the proposal could fund joint research activities such as the use of JET in order to prepare for
the implementation of ITER.

(2002/C 147 E/098)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3083/01

by Marialiese Flemming (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(30 October 2001)

Subject: European safety standards and protective measures for nuclear power stations

What steps has the Commission taken hitherto to draft common European safety standards for nuclear
power stations which would apply in all the Member States of the European Union?

20.6.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 147 E/93

Can the Commission imagine that uniform legally binding safety standards might be adopted, despite the
fact that the Member States use different technologies?

When will the Commission be in a position to submit a Green Paper which might be used as a basis for a
discussion about common European safety standards and protective measures for nuclear power stations?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(12 December 2001)

The competencies of the Union in the Nuclear field are laid down in the Treaty establishing the European
Atomic Energy Community (Euratom Treaty), whose Chapter 3 (Title II) deals with health and safety.

In this context, regulations, directives and guidance related to the area of radiological protection have been
developed with the aim of protection against possible health detriments resulting from exposure to
ionising radiation.

The responsibility to grant
licenses and regulate the siting, design, construction, operation and
decommissioning of nuclear installations rests with Member States and in particular within their Nuclear
Regulatory Authorities, while respecting any requirements resulting from Euratom and other International
Convention and Treaties. Member States have different regulatory regimes and legislative framework and as
a result regulatory procedures vary from State to State, often as a consequence of the differing reactor
technology and administrative framework employed by the Member State.

However, it is important to recall that in June 2001 the Council issued a report (1) on nuclear safety in the
context of the enlargement. This report has been drafted by experts of the Nuclear Regulatory Authorities
of the Member States, with the participation of the Commission. It develops a ‘European perspective’ to
evaluate nuclear safety in candidate states. As a result of this evaluation, a series of recommendations were
addressed to candidate states in order for them to reach a high level of nuclear safety.

Within the context of the Council, a ‘peer review’ mechanism is to be launched in 2002 to monitor the
implementation of these recommendations. The whole process clearly demonstrates that the Community is
able to elaborate a common approach on nuclear safety in spite of the different design and technologies
used in nuclear industries.

(1) COM(2001) 568 final.

(2002/C 147 E/099)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3084/01

by Gabriele Stauner (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(30 October 2001)

Subject: Experts’ statements on the health hazards arising from adulterated butter

Until mid-2000, members of the Italian mafia were involved in the large-scale adulteration of butter,
adding milk-free animal and vegetable fats and chemical substances to it before marketing it through
Belgian, French, German and Italian firms. It is believed that a total of 100 000 tonnes of adulterated butter
was used, principally in the production of pastries and processed cheese. When the fraud was revealed,
neither the Commission nor the Member States took any steps to withdraw from sale the remaining stocks
of products made with the adulterated butter. Nothing was done, despite the fact that, in a press release
published on 5 July 2000, the Italian Public Prosecutor’s Office gave a warning about possible hazards for
consumers’ health.