Euratom monitoring and Article 35 verifications Vesa Tanner European Commission DG Energy Radiation Protection Unit

DG Energy (ENER) Directorates General Policy Security of supply, Energy markets and Networks New and renewable sources of energy, Energy efficiency and Innovation Nuclear energy Nuclear safeguards As of 14 April 2010 8

Directorate D (Nuclear Energy) D.1: EURATOM co-ordination, international relations D.2: Nuclear Energy, waste management D.3: Nuclear accountancy D.4: Radiation protection Sector D.4.001: „Implementation of EURATOM Articles 35 and 36 “ (includes Article 35 verifications) 8

Legal background (1) Art. 35 Euratom Treaty: “Each Member State shall establish the facilities necessary to carry out continuous monitoring of the level of radioactivity in the air, water and soil and to ensure compliance with the basic standards.” “The Commission shall have the right of access to such facilities; it may verify their operation and efficiency.” DG ENER – Radiation Protection unit has the responsibility of undertaking these verifications. Historically, the intensity of the verification activity has been a matter of Commission current policy. 8

Legal background (2) Commission Communication* and Bilateral Protocols deal with the practical arrangements of verification visits: Applicability Scope Guiding Principles Planning of Visits Realisation of Visits Procedure of Reporting * ES: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do ?uri=OJ:C:2006:155:0002:0005:ES:PDF 8

General scope and purpose (1) Verification visits can cover: (1) environmental radiation monitoring of Air Dose and dose rate Water (drinking, ground, marine, inland, precipitation, …) Soil Fallout Biological samples (marine/terrestrial) Foodstuffs (individual samples, mixed diet, milk, wild food products) Feed (2) monitoring of radioactive discharges to the environment (liquid, gaseous) 8

General scope and purpose (2) Verification visits can cover: National monitoring systems (on-line and off-line) Nuclear power plants Nuclear fuel cycle installations Radioactive isotope production plants Hospitals using radioactive isotopes Current and past mining activities NORM activities Research facilities Decommissioning projects 8

General scope and purpose (3) The main purpose is to provide an independent assessment on the adequacy of the monitoring facilities Verification visits should allow a correct evaluation and a judgement of the: Operation of monitoring facilities (their set-up and use) Suitability of sampling and sample preparation methods Suitability of analytical methods, effectiveness of equipment Management of records, results, archives Data handling and reporting procedures Quality control measures 8

Targets Verification visits of installations are split into: discharge monitoring with regard to aerial and liquid effluents, and site-specific environmental monitoring, as performed by the operator and by or on behalf of the regulator Verification visits of national monitoring systems give an overview of country-wide automatic and laboratory based networks emergency monitoring arrangements 8

Reporting by the Commission Draft technical report (in one of the working languages of the European Commission) Checking of factual accuracy by the Member State (groups involved in verification) Finalisation of technical report by the Commission, sent to MS via Permanent Representation Main findings report by the Commission, sent to MS Translation into the MS language if needed, sent to MS for checking language Publication of main findings, technical report and any MS comments on the Europa web site A general report on the whole programme is prepared for the European Parliament on a regular basis.

Planning of visits – Considerations Visit ‘new’ EU Member States in a timely manner Provide follow-up to past visits; in particular if actions were recommended Continue to cover major nuclear activities in all Member States Act in case of (public) concerns Seek a balance between large nuclear facilities and national networks 8

Usual feedback items (1) Frequency of foodstuffs sampling Density of automatic monitoring networks Rain and grass sampling Laboratory hardware and software Laboratory accreditations and quality systems Availability of expertise for online monitoring and database management Long term continuity of the monitoring programmes of past activities

Usual feedback items (2) Lack of discharge monitoring in medical facilities Public availability of results Sample and results archiving Sample management in laboratories Inadequate number of personnel (especially for emergency situations) Lack of in-house expertise in radiation measurements (measurements outsourced to another country)

Recent verification visits (1) Reports of the recent verification visits can be downloaded from the Radiation Protection web site on the EUROPA server: http://ec.europa.eu/energy/nuclear/radiation_protection/ article_35_en.htm This includes the Technical Report, the Main Findings and any Comments by the Member State in which the verification visit took place. Generally these reports are in the language of the Member State as well as in English. 8

Recent verification visits (2) Denmark 2008 Romania Uranium production 2008 Tricastin site (FR) 2008 8

Recent verification visits (3) IRE-Fleurus (Belgium) 2009 Forsmark (Sweden) 2009 8

Recent verification visits (4) Isar-2 (Germany) 2009 Jaslovske Bohunice (Slovakia) 2009 8

Recent verification visits (5) Świerk (Poland) 2009 Bulgaria (former uranium mining issues) 2009 8

Recent verification visits (6) Huelva (Spain) 2009 8

The Article 35 Team Vesa Tanner Three full-time EC officials Four part-time EC officials Detached national experts needed, hard to find Constant Gitzinger Eberhardt Henrich Alan Ryan Vesa Tanner Stefan Mundigl Remigiusz Baranczyk Cecile Hanot 8