1 / 14

Electricity Sectoral Social Dialogue Committee Brussels, 13 September 2013 Jan Jilek

Proposal for a Council Directive amending Directive 2009/71/EURATOM establishing a Community framework for the nuclear safety of nuclear installations. Electricity Sectoral Social Dialogue Committee Brussels, 13 September 2013 Jan Jilek European Commission

carlow
Download Presentation

Electricity Sectoral Social Dialogue Committee Brussels, 13 September 2013 Jan Jilek

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Proposal for a Council Directive amendingDirective 2009/71/EURATOM establishing a Community framework for the nuclear safety of nuclear installations Electricity Sectoral Social Dialogue Committee Brussels, 13 September 2013 Jan Jilek European Commission Directorate-General for Energy Unit D1 – Nuclear safety architectureand multilateral & international cooperation

  2. Why a new directive? • 2 mandatesfrom the European Council after the Fukushima accident • Carry out, together with ENSREG, EU-wide comprehensive risk andsafety assessmentsof nuclear power plants("stress tests") • Review the legal and regulatory framework for the safety of nuclear installations andpropose improvements • Strong support for the revision of the2009 Directive from the EP and the EESC

  3. Main reasons for revision • 2009 NSD: general and limited in scope, it should: • Reflect the current state of knowledge about nuclear safety, including Fukushima lessons • Correspond to European (WENRA) and international (IAEA) requirements • Address technical safety issues, including those identified in the Fukushima accident and the stress tests • The stress tests results showed: • - all lessons learned from previous accidents not taken up and not sufficiently enforced (despite IAEA rules) • - continued differences between MSs in identifying and managing key safety issues

  4. Preparation • Consultations/input: • Generalpublic • Stakeholders: Euratom Article 31 Group,EuropeanNuclear Safety Regulators' Group,industry (Foratom)… • European social partners • Impact assessment: • Several policy options assessed fortheir safety, economic, environmentalandsocialimpacts

  5. Bases • Technical progressin nuclearsafety; sources of expertise:WENRA, IAEA… • Results of the EU stress tests • Lessons learned from theFukushima accident • First assessment of MSs'transposing measures

  6. Main features Safety objectives for nuclear installations European system of topical peer reviews EU-wide harmonised nuclear safety guidelines Transparency Independence and role of national regulators Continuous improvement of nuclear safetythroughout the EU

  7. GeneralSafetyObjective(Art. 8a) Safety objectives More specificprovisions/objectiveson how to achievethe general safetyobjective(Art. 8b) Methodological requirementsrelating to all stages of a lifecycleof the nuclear installation aimingtoensureconsistent and legally verifiableimplementation of the objectives(Art. 8c)

  8. Safety objectives 2 • Flexibleand dynamicprocess:"what" should be done and not"how" it should be done • Continuousimprovement of safety • Development of sound nuclear safety culture • "Framework" character of the Directive;flexibility for national frameworks • Member States can choose amongavailable engineering solutions

  9. Peer reviews: provisions • Existing Directive (2009): • New Directive:

  10. EU-wide safety guidelines • Developed byMember States,with support ofregulatory authorities • Based on : • results of thepeer reviews • resultingtechnical recommendations

  11. New Directive: how it works

  12. Flexibility • The approach is: • non-prescriptive • goal-setting • It allows a dynamic and flexible implementation reflectingprogress in nuclear safety • It enables Member States totake more stringent safety measures

  13. Adoption and implementation • Tentative timeline:

More Related