WRITTEN QUESTION E-1363/02 by Geoffrey Van Orden (PPE-DE) to the Council. The future of Kozloduy nuclear power plant in Bulgaria.
Date: 2002-05-14
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Bulgaria, EU relations, accession negotiations, decommissioning of power stations, nuclear power station, nuclear safety

C 309 E/114

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

12.12.2002

(2002/C 309 E/133)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1356/02

by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) to the Council

(14 May 2002)

Subject: History books

With reference to the answer to Written Question E-3634/01 (1), I am aware that the Member States are
themselves responsible for curriculum content.

It would, however, seem sensible to prepare a common version of our controversial history. Does the
Council agree? Would it care to comment?

(1) OJ C 160 E, 4.7.2002, p. 156.

Reply

(30 September 2002)

The Council is aware of the interest of such an initiative but can only confirm what it said in reply to
question E-3634/01.

(2002/C 309 E/134)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1363/02

by Geoffrey Van Orden (PPE-DE) to the Council

Subject: The future of Kozloduy nuclear power plant in Bulgaria

(14 May 2002)

What objections, if any, do Member States have to the prolongation until 2009 of the life of Units 3 and 4
of the Bulgarian nuclear power plant at Kozloduy, given the recent major investment to enhance the safety
of these units and their importance to the Bulgarian economy?

Reply

(30 September 2002)

The EU has highlighted the importance of high standards of nuclear safety and of a high level of
environmental protection, as reflected in the relevant Council conclusions, from the outset of the accession
negotiations with all the candidate countries by inscribing this objective in its General Negotiating Position.

The Council has repeatedly confirmed its commitment to assist candidate countries to improve nuclear
safety and to develop medium and long-term energy strategies for the replacement of the less safe nuclear
In this perspective and consistent with the priorities contained in the Accession
power reactors.
Partnerships with the relevant countries,
like
Bulgaria, operate reactors that cannot be upgraded to internationally accepted levels of safety at a
reasonable cost, earliest practicable closure of those reactors should be provided for.

the Council emphasises that

for the countries which,

In summer last year, the Council produced a report on Nuclear Safety in the Context of Enlargement,
where it defined more precisely what
including Bulgaria, are expected to
accomplish to reach a high level of nuclear safety. In response, Bulgaria accepted the recommendations
contained in this report, including on the definitive closure of units 1 to 4 of the Kozloduy nuclear power
plant at the earliest possible dates,
in agreement with the understanding signed with the European
Commission on 29 November 1999. Regarding these units and the relevant closure commitments,
however, due to the deficiencies of the original design and the delayed implementation of the upgrading
programme, there remain significant deviations from safety requirements and practices for light water

the candidate countries,

12.12.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 309 E/115

reactors of the same vintage in operation in the EU. This state of affairs reinforces the need to closely
monitor the closure commitments and to give special attention during the remaining operation time to
measures aimed at ensuring a high level of operational safety. Bulgaria committed itself to definitely close
down units 1 and 2 before the year 2003, and to decide on the occasion of the updating of the energy
strategy which will be completed in 2002, the dates of the definitive closure of units 3 and 4, which will
be before the originally envisaged closure dates of 2008 and 2010 respectively. In this context, the EU
underlined its understanding that the closure of units 3 and 4 will take place in 2006 at the latest. Indeed
for units 3-4, it is only by the early and satisfactory completion of the planned upgrading programme that
the existing deviations from safety requirements and practices widely applied within the EU can be limited
to such an extent that the continued operation of units 3 and 4 for a limited time, with firm closure
commitments, could be justified from the point of view of the Council Working Party on Nuclear Safety.

The EU will continue to monitor the situation of nuclear safety in Bulgaria until accession. To this end a
‘peer review’ mechanism has been set up under the auspices of the Council. The review will be finalised in
the accession
time to permit an overall evaluation of Bulgaria’s situation before the conclusion of
negotiations with Bulgaria. To sum up, the Council stresses the safety aspects of the closure commitments,
the need for their timely implementation and to monitor them closely.

(2002/C 309 E/135)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1372/02

by Bob van den Bos (ELDR) to the Council

(14 May 2002)

Subject: EU-Burma relations

The EU’s common position on Burma is due for review by 29 April.

The situation in Burma is still giving cause for concern: no attention whatsoever is being paid to the
fundamental requirements of human rights and democracy. No substantial progress has been made in the
past few months in the secret talks between the military junta (SPDC) and the NLD opposition party. At
least 1 500 political prisoners are still behind bars, while forced labour is still practised in many parts of
Burma. And the many ethnic minorities in Burma have still not been brought into the normalisation
process.

1.
Does the Council share the view that as long as the situation in Burma as regards human rights and
the abovementioned areas does not improve, the European Union must maintain its current common
position? If not, why not?

Is the Council prepared to recommend excluding Burma from the ASEM meeting in September? If

2.
not, why not? If so, how?

In the autumn of 2001 the ILO called on all countries, employers’ organisations and labour
3.
organisations to reconsider their relations with Burma in view of the large-scale and unconcealed practice
of forced labour in that country. Is the Council prepared to take action forthwith to prevent the ILO stance
on Burma from possibly being toned down by other Asian countries? If so, how?

Reply

(3 October 2002)

As the Honourable Member may be aware, the Council extended its Common Position on Burma/
Myanmar for a further six months on 22 April. It has since welcomed the release from house arrest of
Daw Aung San Suu Kyi on 6 May. The Council believes that her release will prove to be of significance