WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2862/97 by Doeke EISMA to the Commission. Investments in the Rovno and Kmelnitsky nuclear power stations in the Ukraine
3. 4. 98 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 102/139 (98/C 102/208) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2859/97 by Patricia McKenna (V) to the Commission (11 September 1997) Subject: Human rights abuses and excessive irradiation at Gorleben Has the Commission seen the video evidence of blatant police brutality during the protects at Gorleben in connection with the recent transports of nuclear waste? Does the Commission feel that legitimate protest against such trans-boundary nuclear waste shipments (where the Commission has a particular responsibility to the EU citizens) can ever justify the abuse of the human rights of citizens of the Union? Furthermore, has the Commission studied or tested the radiation emanating from the actual nuclear waste transport containers in use, to check for compliance with standards based on ICRP 60, as well as generally concerning the actual health of the drivers, police, protesters and general public, most specifically concerning neutron radiation, and is the Commission aware of scientific claims that the radiation from the containers is up to 30 times more dangerous than stated? Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (1 October 1997) The Commission is perfectly aware of the subject of transboundary shipment of nuclear waste within the Community. However, it is not in a position to comment on national measures taken to overcome resistance against legally authorized activities in the nuclear sector. The shipment containers in use are certified and type approved according to international and national regulations and standards. During authorised handling and use, the protection of the population and workers against the dangers arising from ionizing radiation is guaranteed by the application of national legislation, regulations or administrative measures based on the Council Directive laying down the basic safety standards in radiation protection (1). There is no evidence that these standards are not being applied. The currently accepted scientific position on biological radiation effects is reflected by the 1990 recommenda- tions of the International commission on radiological protection (ICRP) issued as Publication No 60. The new basic safety standards Directive 96/29/Euratom (2) mirrors the dosimetry concepts as provided by the ICRP and there is no substantial evidence known which could give reason for modifying these internationally agreed methods for monitoring and assessing doses involving neutrons. (1) OJ L 265, 5. 10. 1984. (2) OJ L 159, 29. 6. 1996. (98/C 102/209) WRITTEN QUESTION P-2862/97 by Doeke Eisma (ELDR) to the Commission (1 September 1997) Subject: Investments in the Rovno and Kmelnitsky nuclear power stations in the Ukraine The EBRD decided some time ago not to participate in the completion of the Rovno 4 and Kmelnitsky 2 nuclear power stations in the Ukraine as investigations had shown that the investment did not meet the áleast-costí criterion with which the Bank must comply. At present the EBRD has commissioned a second study to show whether the completion of one of the plants would in fact satisfy the áleast-costí criterion