title: Ir-Regolament tal-Kunsill (KE) Nru 686/97 ta' l-14 ta'April 1997 li jemenda r-Regolament (KEE) Nru 2847/93 li jistabbilixxi sistema ta' kontroll applikabbli għall-politika komuni tas-sajd

text: 150 MT Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali ta’ l-Unjoni Ewropea 04/Vol. 3 31997R0686 19. 4. 1997 IL-ĠURNAL UFFIĊJALI TAL-KOMUNITAJIET EWROPEJ L 102/1 IR-REGOLAMENT TAL-KUNSILL (KE) Nru 686/97 ta’ l-14 ta’April 1997 li jemenda r-Regolament (KEE) Nru 2847/93 li jistabbilixxi sistema ta’ kontroll applikabbli għall-politika komuni tas-sajd IL-KUNSILL TA’ L-UNJONI EWROPEA, amministrattiva, is-sorveljanza ta’ inħawi sensittivi, il-kontrolli doppji tal-ġurnali t’abbord, u l-kontrolli tal-iżbarkar; Wara li kkunsidrat it-Trattat li jistabilixxi l-Komunità Ewropea, u partikolarment l-Artikolu 43 miġjub fih, Wara li kkunsidraw il-proposta mressqa mill-Kummissjoni (1), Wara li kkunsidra l-opinjoni tal-Parlament Ewropew (2); Filwaqt li lis-skorti tal-ħut ġew sfruttati żżejjed matul dawn l-aħħar snin, u għaldaqstant hemm bżonn ta’ ħidmiet sinjifikanti ta’ tas-sajd sabiex tiġi sorveljanza u ta’ kontroll rmedjata din is-sitwazzjoni; tal-attivitajiet Filwaqt li hemm il-bżonn ta’ miżuri effettivi taħt il-profil ta’ ġest- joni u ta’ spejjeż, u li jtejbu d-disponibilità u l-eżattezza tal- informazzjoni, bħall-introduzzjoni ta’ sistemi ta’ sorveljanza ta’ bastimenti bis-satellita; li, skond l-Artikolu 3 ta’ Regolament (KEE) Filwaqt Nru 2847/93 (3), il-Kunsill jista’ jiddeċiedi li tiġi stabbilita sistema ta’ kontroll kontinwu ta’ lokazzjoni għall-bastimenti tas-sajd tal- Komunità; Billi s-sistema ta’ kontroll ta’ bastimenti bis-satellita għandha tap- plika għal bastimenti tas-sajd tal-Komunità li jaħdmu fl-ibħra ta’ pajjiżi terzi biss fil-każ fejn il-pajjiż jew pajjiżi terzi in kwistjoni ta’ aċċettaw l-obligazzjoni bastimenti bis-satellita għall-bastimenti jaħdmu fl-ibħra tal-Komunità; japplikaw sistema ta’ kontroll tagħhom li li Billi huwa xieraq li jaċċettaw l-obbligu li japplikaw sistema ta’ kontroll ta’ bastimenti bis-satellita għal ċerti bastimenti tal- Komunità li jaħdmu esklussivament f’sajd mal-kosta u sajd ta’ vjaġġi qosra; Billi s-sistema ta’ kontroll ta’ bastimenti bis-satellita għandha tas- sigura li komunikazzjonijiet minn bastimenti tal-Komunità jaslu għand l-Istat tal-bandiera tal-bastiment u mill-kosta tal-Istat Mem- bru fl-istess ħin; Billi huwa xieraq li jkun hemm il-ħsieb li jitwaqqfu sistemi alter- nattivi għas-sistema ta’ kontroll ta’ bastimenti bis-satellita; filwaqt li Stat Membru li jitlob għal din il-possibiltà għandu jagħti prova li s-sistema alternattiva hi effettiva daqs is-sistema ta’ kontroll ta’ bastimenti bis-satellita, Filwaqt li l-esperjenza miksuba fl-applikazzjoni ta’ proġetti pilota li għandhon jiġu mwettqa mill-Istati Membri skond ir-Regolament tal-Kummissjoni (KE) Nru 897/94 tat-22 ta’April 1994 li jiddetta regoli dettaljati għall-applikazzjoni tar-Regolament tal-Kunsill (KEE) Nru 2847/93 f’dak li għandu x’jaqsam ma’ proġetti pilota dwar kontrolli kontinwi ta’ lokazzjoni ta’ bastimenti tas-sajd tal- Komunità (4), uriet li bosta sistemi ta’ kontrolli ta’ bastimenti bis- satellita jistgħu jintużaw sabiex jistabbilixxu l-lokazzjoni tal- bastimenti tas-sajd; Billi ta’ l-kontroll kontinwu bis-satellita ta’ ċertu kategoriji bastimenti tas-sajd tal-Komunità għandu jġib ‘il quddiem l-ħidma (1) ĠU C 209, tal-20. 7. 1996, p. 7. (2) ĠU C 20, tal-20. 1. 1997. (3) ĠU L 261, tal-20. 10. 1993, p. 1. Regolament kif l-aħħar emendat bir- Regolament (KE) Nru 2489/96 (ĠU L 338, tat-28. 12. 1996, p. 12). (4) ĠU L 104, tat-23. 4. 1994, p. 18. Regolament kif emendat bir- Regolament (KE) Nru 376/96 (ĠU L 51, ta’ l-1. 3. 1996, p. 31). ADOTTAT DAN IR-REGOLAMENT: Artikolu 1 L-Artikolu 3 tar- Regolament (KEE) Nru 2847/93 hu minn issa mibdul bit-test segwenti: “Artikolu 3 1. Kull Stat Membru għandu jistabilixxi sistema ta’ kontroll ta’ bastimenti bis-satellita, minn issa ‘l quddiem issir referenza tal- għaliha bħala ‘VMS’, sabiex jikkontrolla l-lokazzjoni bastimenti tas-sajd tal-Komunità. Il-VMS għandha tapplika mhux aktar tard mit-30 ta’Ġunju 1998 għall-bastimenti tas-sajd kollha tal-Komunità li huma akbar minn 20 metru bejn il-perpendikulari jew 24 metru tul b’kollox għal kwalunkwe waħda mill-kategorji segwenti: 04/Vol. 3 MT Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali ta’ l-Unjoni Ewropea 151 — bastimenti li jaħdmu fl-ibħra ewlenin, minbarra fil-baħar Mediterran, — bastimenti li jaħdmu fl-ibħra ta’ pajjiżi terzi, sakemm ikunu saru klawsoli fil-Ftehim mal-pajjiż terz jew pajjiżi terzi rele- vanti għall-applikazzjoni ta’ VMS għall-bastimenti ta’ tali pajjiż jew pajjiżi li jaħdmu fl-ibħra tal-Komunità, 6. Is-sidien tal-bastimenti tas-sajd tal-Komunità li għalihom tapplika VMS għandhom jassiguraw li l-apparati ta’ mmarkar bis-satellita jaħdmu tajjeb f’kull ħin u li l-informazzjoni li għa- liha hemm referenza fil-paragrafu 5 qed tiġi trasmessa. It-trasmissjoni għandha ssir bil-frekwenza ta’ kuljum meħtieġa sabiex jiġi assigurat li l-Istat Membru tal-bandiera u/jew l-Istat Membru kostali jikkontrolla l-bastimenti b’mod effettiv. jkun jista’ — bastimenti li jaqbdu l-ħut li jibdluhom fi smida u żejt. 2. Il-VMS għandha tapplika mhux aktar tard mill-1 ta’ Jan- nar 2000 għall-bastimenti kollha tas-sajd tal-Komunità li huma akbar minn 20 metru bejn il-perpendikulari jew 24 metru tul b’kollox kull fejn joperaw. Madankollu, il-bastimenti tas-sajd tal-Komunità li jaħdmu fl-ibħra ta’ pajjiż jew pajjiżi terzi jkunu suġġetti għall-applikazzjoni ta’ VMS biss fejn tali pajjiż jew pajjiżi terzi jkunu aċċettaw l-obbligazzjoni li japplikaw VMS għall-bastimenti tagħhom li jaħdmu fl-ibħra tal-Komunità. 3. Minkejja l-klawsoli m’għandiex tapplika għal bastimenti: ta’ paragrafi 1 u 2 fuq, l-VMS (a) li joperaw esklussivament fi 12-il mil nawtiku mill-linja bażi tal-Istat Membru tal-bandiera; jew (b) li qatt ma għamlu aktar minn 24 siegħa fil-baħar mill-ħin tat-tluq sa meta jirritornaw lura fil-port. 7. L-Istati Membri għandhom jistabilixxu u jħaddmu ċentri ta’ kontrolli tas-sajd, minn issa ‘l quddiem issir referenza għalihom li għandhom jikkontrollaw l-attivitajiet u bħala ‘FMS’, l-kapaċita’ tas-sajd. Il-FMS għandhom jibdew jaħdmu mhux aktar tard mit-30 ta’ Ġunju 1998. Il-FMS ta’ Stat Membru partikulari għandhom jikkontrollaw l-bastimenti li jtajru l-bandiera tiegħu, mingħajr ma jagħtu każ tal-ibħra li jkunu joperaw fihom jew il-port li jkunu qegħdin jtajru fih, kif ukoll ta’ bastimenti tas-sajd tal-Komunità li l-bandiera ta’ Stati Membri oħra u ta’ bastimenti tas-sajd ta’ pajjiżi terzi li għalihom tapplika VMS fl-ibħra taħt is-sovranita’ jew il-ġurisdizzjoni ta’ dak l-Istat Membru partikolari. 8. Kull Stat Membru tal-bandiera għandu jaħtar l-awtoritajiet kompetenti responsabbli għal-FMS u għandu jieħu l-miżuri adattati sabiex ikun żgurat li l-FMS tiegħu għandu r-riżorsi xierqa għall-persunal u huwa ekwippaġġat b’ hardware u soft- ware tal-komputer li jippermetti pproċessar tad-data u tras- missjoni tad-data elettronika. L-Istati Membri għandhom jip- provdu għal proċeduri ta’ back-up u rkupru fil-każ ta’ falliment tas-sistema. L-Isati Membri jistgħu iħaddmu FMS flimkien. 4. Meta Stat Membru jimponi VMS fuq bastimenti li jtajru l-bandiera tiegħu u li ma jaqawx fl-iskop ta’ paragrafi 1 sa 3, dawk il-bastimenti jkunu eliġibbli għall-istess għajnuna finanzjarja li tapplika għall-bastimenti li japplikaw VMS taħt paragrafi 1 u 2. 9. L-Istat Membru tal-bandiera għandu jieħu l-miżuri neċes- sarji sabiex ikun żgurat li d-data li jirċievu l-bastimenti tas-sajd tiegħu li għalih tapplika VMS tkun rreġistrata b’mod li tkun tista’ tinqara mill-kompjuter għal perjodu ta’ tliet snin. 5. L-Istati Membri għandhom jassiguraw li jiġi nstallat b’mod effettiv apparat ta’ mmarkar bis-satellita fuq bastimenti tas-sajd tal-Komunità li jtajru l-bandiera tagħhom li għalihom għandha tapplika VMS. L-apparat ta’ mmarkar bis-satellita jippermetti bastiment tas-sajd li jikkomunika permezz ta’ satellita mal-Istat tal-bandiera u mal-Istat Membru kostali kkonċernat fl-istess ħin, il-posizzjoni ġeografika tiegħu u fejn hemm bżonn ir-rapporti ta’ ħidma li għalihom hemm referenza fl-Arti- kolu 19b. Fil-każ ta’ forza maġġuri għandha tiġi kkomunikata informazzjoni relevanti permezz tar-radju fuq stazzjon tar- radju approvat taħt regoli tal-Komunità għar-riċeviment ta’ din l-informazzjoni jew bil-mezzi speċifikati fl-Artikolu 19ċ. L-Istat Membru kostali għandu jieħu l-miżuri neċessarji sabiex ikun żgurat li d-data li jirċievu l-bastimenti tas-sajd li jtajru l-bandiera ta’ Stat Membru ieħor jew ta’ pajjiż terz li għalihom tapplika VMS tkun rreġistrata b’mod ili tkun tista’ tinqara mill- kompjuter għal perjodu ta’ tliet snin. Il-Kummissjoni għandu jkollha aċċess għal dawn il-files tal- kompjuter fuq bażi ta’ talba speċifika. Il-klawsoli ta’ l-Arti- kolu 37 għandhom japplikaw. 152 MT Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali ta’ l-Unjoni Ewropea 04/Vol. 3 10. Regoli dettaljati għall-implimentazzjoni ta’ dan l-Artikolu għandhom jiġu deċiżi bi qbil mal-proċedura dettata fl-Arti- kolu 36. B’mod partikolari, fuq bażi ta’ applikazzjoni ta’ Stat Membru u bi qbil mal-klawsoli ta’ l-Artikolu 36, il-Kummissjoni tista tid- deċiedi li tiġi applikata sistema alternattiva għal-VMS, waqt li jiġi kkunsidrat it-tip ta’ sistema ta’ kontroll propost, it-tip ta’ bastiment jew bastimenti tas-sajd, il-post jew postijiet fejn isir is-sajd, l-ispeċi mmirati u t-tul tal-vjaġġi tas-sajd. Is-sistema alternattiva għandha tkun effettiva daqs VMS u tapplika fuq bażi mhux diskriminatorja. ’” Artikolu 2 Dan ir-Regolament għandu jidħol fis-seħħ fis-seba’ jum wara l-pubblikazzjoni tiegħu fil-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Komunitajiet Ewropej. Dan ir-Regolament għandu jorbot fl-intier tiegħu u japplika direttament fl-Istati Membri kollha. Magħmul fil-Lussemburgu, fl-14 ta’ April 1997. Għall-Kunsill Il-President J. VAN AARTSEN


title: FÆLLES HOLDNING (EF) Nr. 19/97 fastlagt af Rådet den 14. april 1997 med henblik på vedtagelse af Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets ottende direktiv 97/.../EF af ... om bestemmelser vedrørende sommertid

eurovoc_concepts:
EU policy
approximation of laws
common transport policy
communications policy
summertime

formats: html pdfa1b print


title: Verordening (EG) nr. 701/97 van de Raad van 14 april 1997 tot vaststelling van een programma ter bevordering van de internationale samenwerking in de energiesector - Synergy-programma

eurovoc_concepts:
EU financing
action programme
energy policy
energy technology
environmental protection
international cooperation


title: 97/253/EG, Euratom: Besluit van de Raad van 14 april 1997 houdende benoeming van een lid van het Economisch en Sociaal Comité

eurovoc_concepts:
European Economic and Social Committee
France
appointment of staff


title: Règlement (CE) nº 641/97 de la Commission du 14 avril 1997 modifiant le règlement (CE) nº 1249/96 portant modalités d'application du règlement (CEE) nº 1766/92 du Conseil en ce qui concerne les droits à l'importation dans le secteur des céréales

eurovoc_concepts:
CCT duties
cereals
customs formalities
food processing
import
product quality


title: Komission kertomus neuvostolle ja Euroopan parlamentille edellytyksistä, joiden mukaisesti Pettenin HFR-reaktorin käytöstä poistamista olisi suunniteltava

eurovoc_concepts:
Joint Research Centre
Netherlands
committee report
nuclear reactor
radioactive waste
storage of waste

text: EUROOPAN YHTEISÖJEN KOMISSIO Bryssel, 14. 04. 1997 KOM(97) 150 lopull. KOMISSION KERTOMUS NEUVOSTOLLE JA EUROOPAN PARLAMENTILLE edellytyksistä, joiden mukaisesti Pettenin HFR-reaktorin käytöstä poistamista olisi suunniteltava Neuvosto hyväksyi 27 päivänä kesääkuuta 1996 "Yhteisen tutkimuskeskuksen Euroopan atomienergiayhteisöä varten toteutettavaksi tulevan täydentävän tutkimusohjelman (1996 - 1999)" Euroopan atomienergiayhteisön perustamissopimuksen 7 artiklan mukaisesti. Hyväksymisen yhteydessä seuraava lausuma liitettiin neuvoston pöytäkirjaan: "Neuvosto toteaa, että komissio varaa aikaisempien vuosien tapaan määrärahoja käytöstäpoistamiseen vahvistaessaan säteilytyspalveluja koskevat tariffit. Nämä määrärahat liitetään jo aikaisemmin hyväksyttyihin määrärahoihin ja käytetään sopivana ajankohtana Lisäksi komissio selvittää HFR:n käytöstä poistamista ja laatii neuvostolle kertomuksen ennen vuoden 1996 loppua. " Komissio kehottaa neuvostoa ja parlamenttia ottamaan huomioon oheisen kertomuksen. •x KQMISSKffl KMTQMVS NEVVQ$TQ^LE JA EUROOPAN PARLAMENTILLE edellytyksistä, joiden mukaisesti Petteriin HFR-reaktorin käytöstä poistamista olisi suunniteltava Johdanto HFR:n osalta käytöstä poistaminen ei ole kiireellinen käytännöllinen kysymys. Reaktori on erittäin hyvässä teknisessä kunnossa. Tämä on sen tärkeimpien komponenttien jatkuvan parantamisen ja säännöllisen uudistamisen ansiota. Nykyisen reaktorin paineastian jäljellä oleva käyttöikä - paineastia vaihdettiin vuosina 1984 - 85 ja sen suunniteltu kokonaiskäyttöikä on 30 vuotta - mahdollistaa HFR:n toiminnan vuoteen 2015 asti ja jopa tätä kauemmin, ja kolmen vuoden välein suoritettavien sisäisten tarkastusten tarkoituksena on tämän takaaminen Lisäksi varastossa on toinen täysin hyväksytty reaktorin paineastia, joka on samanlainen kuin HFR:n nykyinen paineastia ja jota voidaan käyttää uudessa paineastian vaihto-operaatiossa Näin ollen komissiolla on vuoden 2015 tienoilla valittavanaan kolme vaihtoehtoa: lopettaa HFRn toiminta ja ehdottaa sen poistamista käytöstä; arvioida paineastian tarkka kunto ja päättää reaktorin käyttöiän jatkamisesta säilyttäen sen nykyinen paineastia, päättää paineastian kunnon arvioimisen jälkeen sen korvaamisesta Ensimmäistä ja kolmatta vaihtoehtoa vastaavat HFR:n pitkän aikavälin toiminta-aikataulut esitetään taulukoissa 1 ja 2 Valinta naiden vaihtoehtojen välillä vaatii perusteellisia neuvotteluja Alankomaiden toimilupaviranomaisten, HFR aa tuolloin tukevien jäsenmaiden sekä asiakkaiden kanssa Päätös tehdään erityisesti reaktorin kannattavuutta kyseisenä ajankohtana koskevan taloudellisen arvioinnin perusteella Näin ollen kysymys HFR n kaytostäpoistamisesta tullee ajankohtaiseksi vasta vuoden 2015 jälkeen, ja saattaa olla, ettei se nouse esiin ennen ensi vuosisadan puoliväliä HFRn ominaispiirteiden ansiosta voidaan kuitenkin kuvata käytöstäpoistamisen prosessia ja arvioida sen kustannuksia paatoksen ajankohdasta riippumatta. Tassa asiakirjassa käsitellään tata kysymystä ja se on ollut asiantuntijoiden (DETECin Saksassa) arvioitavana Arvioinnissa vahvistettiin ehdotuksen toteuttamiskelpoisuus sekä arvioitujen jätemäärien paikkansapitävyys (DETEC on tunnustettu ja kokenut yhtiö käytöstäpoiston alalla ja SIEMENSin ja NUKEMin yhteinen tytäryhtiö) Asiantuntijoiden kommentit on sisällytetty komission kertomukseen. Vaikutti kuitenkin hyödylliseltä alkuperäisenä englanninkielisenä versiona siihen myös DETECin teknisen raportin liittää 4, cu I. Tutkimuksen kohde Tässä alustavassa tutkimuksessa määritellään Pettenin HFR: n käytöstäpoistamisen päävaiheet, ja se perustuu Kansainvälisen atomienergiaviraston (IAEA) julkaisuun Safety Series no. 74 "Safety in Decommisioning of Research Reactors", Safety Guide 1986. Siinä esitetään myös HFR:n purkamisen ja käytöstäpoistamisen suunnitellut vaiheet sekä karkea arvio siihen liittyvistä jätemääristä ja kustannuksista. II. Käytöstäpoistamisen vaiheet Käytöstäpoistamisprosessin katsotaan alkavan HFR-reaktorin lopullisesta sulkemisesta ja päättyvän reaktorin sijoituspaikan vapauttamiseen rajoittamatonta käyttöä varten. Tässä prosessissa voidaan erottaa kolme vaihetta: Vaihe 1 - Valvonnan alainen varastointi Reaktorin jatkuva valvonta on välttämätöntä tämän vaiheen aikana ja sen jälkeen. Tärkeimpiä toimenpiteitä ovat: polttoaineen poistaminen, jäähdytteiden radioaktiivisten aineiden poistaminen. ja muiden helposti poistettavien aktivoituneiden tai lievästi Tämä on helposti toteutettavissa laitoksen nykyisiä laitteita käyttäen ja kohtuullisen alhaisin kustannuksin l aihe 2 - Sijoituspaikan rajoitettu käyttö Käytöstäpoistamistoimien seurauksena osa sijoituspaikasta voidaan tämän vaiheen jälkeen vapauttaa rajoitettuun käyttöön ja reaktorin ja sijoituspaikan jäljelle jäävät osat varastoidaan valvotusti Tärkeimpiä toimenpiteitä ovat saasteiden poistaminen kaikilta alueilta, joissa dekontaminaatio on helppo suorittaa; jäljellejäävien radioaktiivisuutta sisältävien alueiden fyysinen sulkeminen. tai korkeasti saastuneiden Tahan sisältyy paineastian ja kaikkien aktivoituneiden komponenttien ja primääripiirista, aktivoituneiden tai saastuneiden altaan vaipan ja betoniseinien osien poistaminen sekä kaikkien vielä mahdollisesti aktiivisuutta sisältävien osien sinetöinti. (suihkuputket) poistaminen paineastian ympäriltä, altaasta Kaikki tarvittavat toimenpiteet voidaan suorittaa laitoksen omaa henkilökuntaa ja asiantuntemusta kaMtaen (mukaan lukien Energy Centrum Nederland - ECN). Jäte toimitettaisiin hollantilaiseen jätteiden loppusijoituslaitokseen COVRA:an (Centrale Organisatie Voor Radioactief Afval), vaikka pieni määrä täytyisi varastoida tilapäisesti ECNn keskiaktiivisen jätteen varastoon ennen kuljetusta COVRA:n laitokseen. Vaihe 3 - Sijoituspaikan rajoittamaton käyttö Tässä vaiheessa reaktorin käytöstäpoistaminen saatetaan loppuun. Kaikki radioaktiiviset aineet, välineet ja rakenteet joko puhdistetaan saasteesta tai siirretään hollantilaiseen loppusijoituslaitokseen COVRA. an. Tämän jälkeen suoritetaan lopullinen säteilytutkimus sen varmistamiseksi, ettei sijoituspaikalle ole jäänyt radioaktiivisia jäämiä, jonka jälkeen sijoituspaikka eikä mitään muita valvontatarkastuksia tai kokeita vaadita. Rakennukset ja sijoituspaikka vapautetaan ydinlakien velvoitteista. rajoittamattomaan vapautetaan käyttöön, Tämän ydinlakien velvoitteista vapauttamisen jälkeen sijoituspaikkaa ja rakennuksia voidaan suunnitella käytettävän mihin tahansa muuhun tarkoitukseen, josta saattaa syntyä tuloja, mutta jos näin ei tapahdu, vaiheesta 3 aiheutuneet kustannukset liitetään tavallisten rakennusten tavanomaiseen hallintaan. Vaiheeseen 3 on ehdotettu siirryttävän välittömästi vaiheen 2 loppuun saattamisen jälkeen Asiantuntijoiden mukaan käytöstäpoistamisoperaation suorittamisesta yhtäjaksoisesti aina vaiheen 3 loppuun asti ovat huomattavia verrattuna vaihtoehtoon, jossa vaihe 3 toteutetaan odotusajan jälkeen. saavutetaan jotka edut, Käytöstäpoistamisesta aiheutuvat kustannukset: Valmistelu ja yhteydet toimilupaviranomaisiin Varsinaisen työn suunnittelu ja toteutus (ECN:n nykyisen toimintasopimuksen mukainen kapasiteetti on pidettävä yllä noin 1,5 vuoden ajan) Jätteen loppusijoitus COVRA an Yhteensä (karkea arvio) 2 milj. ecua 14 milj. ecua 9 milj. ecua 25 milj. ecua III. Käytöstäpoistamiseen liittyvien toimenpiteiden suoritusjärjestys HFRn kävtöstapoistamiseen liittyvät toimenpiteet perustuvat kokemuksiin, jotka saatiin vuosina 1984 - 85 suoritetun paineastian vaihdon yhteydessä. Tuolloin koko operaation suoritti normaali kaytto- ja huoltohenkilökunta, ja lisäapua saatiin HFR:n käyttäjiltä ja sijoituspaikan verstaalta Vuonna 1984 suoritetun paineastian vaihdon yhteydessä käsiteltyjen jätemäärien perusteella yleinen toimintatapa on vaihe vaiheelta seuraava: 0. Polttoaine-elementtien poistammen varastoidaan Polttoaine-elementit jälleenkäsittelylaitokseen turvallisesti muualla tai kuljetetaan /. Apuvälineiden ja -mekanismien poistaminen paineastian sisältä ja ympäriltä Jätemäärän arvioidaan olevan sama, sillä apuvälineet ovat hyvin samankaltaiset. 2. Suihkuputkien ja paineastian muiden "kiinteiden" yhteyksien (eli hallintarakenteiden jne. ) poistaminen hajottamalla Suihkuputkista ja muista "kiinteistä" rakenteista syntyy sama jätemäärä, mutta ruostumattomasta teräksestä valmistettujen pulttien ja renkaiden lisääntyneen käytön vuoksi keskiaktiivisia osia on hiukan enemmän. Ruostumattoman teräksen määrä on erittäin alhainen, koska paljeliitoksia ei ole käytetty. Tällä kertaa esiintyy kuitenkin enemmän ainesta, jonka paksuus on yli 3 cm ja joka vaatii jätteenä erityiskäsittelyä. 3. Paineastian poistaminen Itse paineastiasta peräisin olevaa ainetta on vähemmän, joskin se on aikaisempaa paksumpaa. 4. Suihkuputkien 11 ja 12 aktiivisten osien ja altaan vaipan radioaktiivisia kohtia sisältävien osien poistaminen Suihkuputkista 11 ja 12 syntyvän jätteen määrä on pienentynyt yksinkertaistetun rakenteen ansioista; altaan vaipasta syntyvän aineen määräksi on arvioitu 10 prosenttia kokonaismäärästä. 5. Aktivoituneen betonin poistaminen altaan seinistä suihkuputkiaukkojen ympäriltä Suihkuputkiaukkoja ympäröivän aktivoituneen betonin osalta oletetaan, että "läpäisysyvyys" aukkojen ympärillä on keskimäärin 30 cm. 6. A /taan pohjavaipan alla olevan saastuneen betonin poistaminen takia altaan pohjavaipan alla olevan saastuneen betonin Esiintyvien vuotojen paksuudeksi arvioidaan samoin 30 cm Pystyseinien osalta ainoastaan allasportteja ympäröivän betonin epäillään mahdollisesti saastuneen. Perusteellinen saasteiden poistaminen kaikista primäärijäähdytysjärjestelmän altaan jäähdytysjärjestelmän Saasteiden poistamisen seurauksena primääri- ja allasjärjestelmän putkistoista syntyy Itse kiinteä aine ei aktivoidu. Sama pätee pelkästään dekontaminaationesteitä apujärjestelmiin, kuten kuumaan ja lämpimään vesitysjärjestelmään. piihputkistoista ja (S. Aktivoituneiden ja tai saastuneiden apuvälineiden (ionivaihtimien hartsit, työkalut jne. ) ja standardikoelaitteistojen poistaminen Ionivaihtimien hartsin maara on hyvin tiedossa, ja perusteellisen talteenoton jälkeen hartsia voidaan käsitellä matala-aktiivisena jätteenä. Työkaluista, varastohyllyistä jne. muodostuu dekontaminaation jälkeen vain vähäisiä määriä hiukan aktivoitunutta ainetta Standardikoelaitteistojen poistamisen osalta arviot perustuvat vuoden 1991 tilanteeseen 9. Järjestelmän jäljelle jaä\ ien osien \ le me n säteily tarkastus Laitoksen lopullisen säteilytarkastuksen tuloksena odotetaan syntyvän pieniä määriä ainoastaan matala-asteista jätettä 10. Normaalit purkutyöt laitoksen jatkokäytön vaatimalle tasolle Tämä operaatio koskee ainoastaan aktivoitumatonta ainetta. ja jätemäärät Taulukossa 3 esitetään arvioidut keskiaktiivinen jäte voidaan varastoida väliaikaisesti ECN:n jätelaitokseen. Jos jäte kuljetetaan Borselen COVRA:an ja varastoidaan siellä, voidaan taulukon 3 luvut siirtää taulukkoon 4. jaoteltuina. Korkea- lajeittain Kaiken kaikkiaan korkea-ja keskiaktiivisen jätteen määrän odotetaan olevan 5 m-* ja 370 TBq (1000 Ci) ja matala-aktiivisen jätteen 120 m3 ja 5,9 TBq (16 Ci). Taulukko 1: HFR:n pitkän aikavälin toiminta-aikataulu (ensimmäinen vaihtoehto) Ajanjakso: 1996 - 20JO Vuosi: 1 9 - 20 1 W. - 0«) 10 11 12 1. 1 14 15 16 17 1 8 - 30 Vuokrasopimus KomisM. v- AI. inkoiua. il \ \ k\ i>>*n III K aa |. i IVttemn Mimtuspaikkna koskevan Komissio-Alankomaat-vuokrasopimuksen jäljellä oleva aika I II R-paineastian kAMioik. 1 I II R n paineastian nro 2 odotettu jäljellä oleva kävttöikä I II R n käxtöstApoiMammen Valmistelu Vaiheet 1 ja 2 Vathe 3 (TN Valmistelu Ajanjakso: 2031 - 2065 Vuosi: 20. 31 -61 i Sijoituspaikan rajoittamaton käyttö 62 63 64 65 Vuokrasopimus Komissio- Alankomaat Nykyisen HFRää ja Pettenin sijoituspaikkaa koskevan Komissio-zVlankomaat-vuokrasopimuksen jäljellä olevan ajan jatkuminen HFR:n käytöstäpoistaminen Vaihe 3 Sijoituspaikan rajoittamattoman käytön jatkaminen Taulukko 2: HFR:n pitkän aikavälin toiminta-aikataulu (kolmas vaihtoehto) Ajanjakso: 1996 - 2030 Vuosi !•;. - 20 •><>. i »'< n 12 13 14 15 16 1 7- 30 Vuokrasopimus Komissio- \lank omaat \ \ k \ t s en III R a. t I. I IViteiitii M|o<tiivpaikkaa koskevan Komissio- Alankomaat-vuokrasopimuksen jäljellä oleva aika III R-pameastiaii k. 1\tl«tk. i III K n paineavlian nro 2 odotettu |at|ella oleva k. ivttoika 111 R:n olemassa olevan paineastian nro 3 odotettu käyttöikä III R n paineastian v. tihl. uniricn Valnnstelu Vaihto Ajanjakso: 2031 - 2065 ValmMelu Vuosi: 20. 11 -43 4-4 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 -61 62 63 64 65 XJ Vuokrasopimus Komissio-Alankomaat Nyk\isen HFR aa ja Pettenin sijoituspaikkaa koskevan Komissio-Alankomaat-vuokrasopimuksen jäljellä olevan ajan jatkuminen HFRn paineastian käyttöikä IfFR n paineastian nro 3 odotettu jatkettu kaAttöikä. HFRn käytöstäpoistaminen Valmistelu Vaiheet 1 ja 2 Vaihe 3 Valmistelu Sijoituspaikan rajoittamaton käyttö Taulukko 3: Arvioidut jätemäärät jaoteltuna lajin ja tai määränpään mukaan Jätelaji Korkea/keskiaktiivinen jäte Vakiomittaiset jatclaatikot (25 1), jotka sisältävät Tynnyrit Alumiinia Terästä Paineastia ja apuvälineet paineastian ympärillä 180 20 oQ Aktivoitunut betoni Saastuneet apuvälineet - - - - kCi 1,0 - - YHTEENSÄ 180 20 1,0 200 1 600 1 200 20 220 130 550 - - 20 Ci 12 2 2 16 Taulukko 4: Arvioitu ( 'OI RA an varastoitava jätemäärä Betomsäiliöiden lukumäärä Säiliön tilavuus 200 1 6(H) 1 Annosekvivalent ti/tunti <0,2 mSv/h >0,2 mSv/ <0. 2 mSv/h >0,2 mSv/h iQ Paineastia ja apuvälineet paineastian ympärillä Aktivoitunut betoni Saastuneet apuvälineet YHTEENSÄ <2,0 mSv/h <2,0 mSv/h 200 150 150 500 - - - - 1(H) 100 - - 100 " 100 DETEC Bericht Empfänger siehe Verteiler Titel: E x p e rt Review of t he D r a ft JRC P e t t en Document on Decommissioning of HFR P e t t en (Summarizing Report) • Revision siehe Revtstonsuoersichi ULS Blattzahl Ersteller Datum Pruter • P«tum Fretgabe ProjekUeiter j Datum Erstausgabe S 15 Obergeordnetes Dokument Projekt-Nr 0 7. C9 ?* UVST DN 154009 DE140 'dWfc ACK ' frj^* DNR 00062610 - 00 Funkhon IV Komponente _» Baugruppe Bau EB Lfd. Nr. AG RIX t I IA 1 UA i BE U DETEC InterneKennzachnung: ; - n er r. unwe::: 5025005 Schutzvermerk nacfi DIN 34 beachten / )o Btatt i Formbtett DE 110. DOT / QM / 09. 94 Revisionsöbersicht Blatt Beschreibung der Anderung a li First issue R1X/Datum 0 0 / 2 9. 0 8. 96 DETEC Expert Review of the Draft JRC Petten Document on Decommissioning of HFR Petten Schutzvermerk nach OIN 34 beachten 1 0 DNR RIX 00062610 - 00 Blatt Formbtatt DE102. DOT / QM / 09. 94 Contents p a ge Abstract 1 Scope 2 Assumptions 3 Review of technical concept 4 Review of costs 4. 1 Plausibility check 4. 2 Detailed evaluation 10 10 13 DETEC Expert Review of the Draft JRC Petten Document on Decommissioning of HFR Petten DNR 00062610 RIX 00 Blatt Fofmbtatt DE103. DOT / QM / 09. 9- Schutzvermerk nach DIN 34 beachten i£ Abstract The intention of the expert review is to check the feasibility of the technical concept and the plausibility of the estimated costs. A comparison of HFR with 3 German research reactors actually in the state of decommissioning leads to the result that the cal culated amounts of waste and costs seem to be in a reasonable order of magnitude if one takes into account: the comparatively low residual radioactivity of the HFR the comparatively low estimated waste arisings low estimated decommissioning and temporary supervision costs. The results obtained by a plausibility check were subsequently confirmed by an independent detailed calculation. Total costs for decommissioning to free release (directly following stage 2) should therefore not exceed 25 MECU. Weighing the pros and cons for decommissioning as planned, it becomes apparent that there are hardly any pros left for a long time phase of supervision following stage 2. r. adioactive decay, the argument often used in favour of defer ring stage 2, is of no significant importance. A dormancy peri od cf several decades will not improve the contamination situa tion substantially and will therefore not lighten the dismant ling work decisively. Conversely, the advantages of immediate decommissioning to un restricted release of the controlled areas are obvious: • Auxiliary systems that will be needed for decommissioning are either still in operating condition or can be kept ope rational. Deferred dismantling would require new installa tions with all implications (such as licensing). DETEC Expert Review of the Draft JRC Petten Document on Decommissioning of HFR Petten DNR 00062610 RIX 00 Blatt Formfatatt DE103. DOT / QM / 09. 9< Schutzvermerk nach DIN 34 beacftten 13 Costs for sampling and waste management (decontamination, waste conditioning) can be kept low as long as neighbouring JRC still has appropriate facilities at its disposal. This might not be the case several decades after decommissioning to stage 2. The availability of experienced HFP> staff and of personnel with specific HFR knowledge at authorities and in industry. That knowledge is about to disappear gradually. DETEC Expert Review of the Draft JRC Petten Document on Decommissioning of HFR Petten DNR 00062610 RIX 00 Blatt Focmblatt DE103 DOT / QM / 09. 5 Schutzvermerk nach DIN 34 beachten A v 1 Scope The Institute for Advanced Materials, HFR Unit, at Petten has prepared a preliminary study about the decommissioning of the High Flux Reactor (HFR) at Petten. The study is based on IAEA Safety Series no. 74 „Safety in De commissioning of Research Reactors", Safety Guide, 1986. It estimates expected costs for reactor dismantling including amounts of waste and costs of waste disposal. It is the intention of the expert review to check the feasibi lity of the technical concept and the plausibility of the esti mated costs. 2 Assumptions The expert review is based upon the following assumptions: - decommissioning of HFR will be performed in accordance with IAEA Safety Series no. 74. after decontamination and dismantling of contaminated and activated areas and components the buildings will be re turned to the former owner for unrestricted site use. -est dismantling work will be performed by the HFR operating staff, ail costs are calculated on 1996 price level. DETEC ExDert Review of the Draft JRC Petten Document on Decommissioning of HFR Petten Schutzvermerk naeft DIN 34 beachten DNR RIX 00062610 - 00 Blatt Formbtatt DE103. DOT/QM/0994 1 J 3 Review of technical concept The IAEA Safety Series no. 74 recommends decommissioning by three stages: stage 1 includes the removal of fuel and all other removable contaminated and activated material like for example • cooling water. stage 2 comprises decontamination and disassembly of such areas and components which can be quite easily trea ted and removed like the reactor vessel. In stage 2 it is intended to remove the main part of activity and to achieve unrestricted release conditi ons for large building areas. Those areas which can not easily be cleaned from activity will be sealed and will remain as restricted use areas for perhaps a long period of time. stage 3 finally will consist in removing all the remaining contamination and activation and will terminate the decommissioning by unrestricted release of the com plete facility. The HFR preliminary study strictly follows these recommendati ons. It must be mentioned that the IAEA Safety Series no. 74 is no binding regulation but a guide which explicitely admits depar tures from the recommended strategy. 3y the experience of decommissioning German research reactors e. g. AYR, FR-2 and MZFR) a 3-stage strategy guided by the gra- ae of technical complexity and by the radiological demands is a very reasonable approach to decommissioning. But we do not fol low the idea to keep the facility within stage 2 for perhaps DETEC Expert Review of the Draft JRC Petten Document on Decommissioning of HFR Petten Schutzvermerk nach DIN 34 beachten 1£ DNR RIX 00062610 - 00 Blatt Formbtatt DE103. DOT / QM / 09. 94 some ten years, an idea which at least is implicitely included in this concept. By nearly all actual decommissioning projects it can be learned that direct and immediate dismantling is the most effective way. This can be supported by mainly two arguments: until completion of stage 3 at least some auxiliary systems like ventilation and off-gas systems must be kept working. This will cause costs. - practical experience demonstrates the need for operating staff availability during all stages of decommissioning. Se veral decades after shut down it cannot be expected that ex perienced operating personnel from the facility will still be at hand. This situation will then also give rise to addi tional costs. Taking into account the development of waste disposal costs it must be an additional argument to complete the work as soon as possible - once the decision for final shut down has been ta ken. We therefore strongly recommend to perform the decommissioning stage-wise but without long interruptions between different stages. The decommissioning sequence described in chapter III of the HFR preliminary study seems to be reasonable but with one exception: decontamination of the primary system and pool coo ling system (item 7) should be performed right at the beginning of the decommissioning work. To be precise: decontamination should be foreseen directly after item 1. Decontamination of the primary and pool coolant loop system should be performed with Full System Chemical Decontamination (FSD). Highly efficient closed loop processes of this kind also DETEC Expert Review of the Draft JRC Petten Document on Decommissioning of HFR Petten Schutzvermerk nach DIN 34 beachten DNR RIX 00062610 - 00 Blatt 8 Formbtatt DE 103. DOT / QM / 09. 9- 1} for aluminum are available. Such a process will decontaminate large system areas fairly down below the limit values for mate rial free release. Appropriate processes are available which are strongly waste minimizing. Ion exchange resins which contain the total amount of activity and of kations will be the only secondary waste re sulting from such processes. Decontamination chemicals are com pletely decomposed within the process and will not contribute to the waste volume. FSD will not only help to save dose rate during system dismant ling but will also help to save costs because the complete sy stem will be decontaminated in one single working operation and most of the material can afterwards be reused unrestrictedly. The application of FSD presupposes an intact system to be de contaminated which is an additional demand for performing this process at an early stage of decommissioning. After FSD of primary system and pool cooling loops the pool it self should be decontaminated by standard chemical spraying. We have based our cost review on a decontamination strategy just outlined above. DETEC Schutzvermerk nach DIN 34 beachten Expert Review the Draft JRC Petten Document on Decommissioning of HFR Petten DNR 00062610 RIX - 00 Blatt Formblatt DE103. DOT/QM/09. fr \ % 4 Review of costs 4. 1 Plausibility check The preliminary study gives a rough estimate for HFR waste arisings and decommissioning costs. For an overall plausibility check it is helpful to compare data of HFR with corresponding data of other research reactors. For this comparison German re search reactors of different types were chosen. Their electric power is of the same order of magnitude like HFR and actually they are in the state of decommissioning. For these comparative reactors the decomissioning will also be terminated by unre stricted release of the controlled areas. Details are shown in the following Tables 1 and 2. The cost data of the reactors 'status: January 1995) are based upon a BMBF publication. In our opinion the data of waste amount and costs given in the Tables for HFR fit together with the 3 other projects in a reasonable manner if one takes into account: the comparatively low residual radioactivity of the HFR, which is due to the very compact design of the high flux reactor and the material aluminum (already experienced during the reac tor vessel dismantling campaign in 1984), the comparatively low estimated waste arising with decom- missioning of HFR, which is a direct consequence of the low residual radioactivity, the low estimated decommissioning costs, which are directly depending upon the low waste arisings, the assumed availability of the operating staff and again the low residual radioactivity which both contribute to low temporary supervision costs. DETEC Expert Review of the Draft JRC Petten Document on Decommissioning of HFR Petten Schutzvermerk nach DIN 34 beachten DNR RIX 00062610 - 00 Blatt 10 Formbött DE103. DOT / QM / 09. 9- ^3 Table 1: Drawing up of relevant data of research reactors (DM/ECU = 1. 85) name/site/country: AVR Julien (Germany) electric power (at operation) : 15 MWe residual radioactivity: 2. 6 E15 Bq (after removal of nuclear fuel) estimated waste arisings for dispo 668 Mg steel sal: 2000 Mg concrete 1015 Mg other materials estimated decommissioning costs to 193 MECU stage 3: estimated temporary supervision 11 MECU/year costs in stage 1: name/site/country: FR-2 Karlsruhe (Germany) electric power (at operation): 44 MWe residual radioactivity: 6. 5 E15 Bq (after removal of nuclear fuel) estimated waste arisings for dispo 1200 Mg total sal without thermal column): estimated decommissioning costs to 132 MECU stage 3: estimated temporary supervision 2. 4 MECU/year costs in stage 2: DETEC Expert Review of the Draft JRC Petten Document on Decommissioning of HFR Petten Schutzvermerk nach DIN 34 beachten ^o DNR 00062610 Blatt RIX 00 11 Formbtatt DE103. DOT / QM / 09. 94 Table 2: Drawing up of relevant data of research reactors (DM/ECU = 1. 85) name/site/country: MZFR Karlsruhe (Germany) electric power (at operation): 58 MWe residual radioactivity: 1 E17 Bq (after removal of nuclear fuel) estimated waste arisings for dispo 1580 Mg steel sal: 1080 Mg concrete 100 Mg other materials estimated decommissioning costs to 237 MECU stage 3: estimated temporary supervision 4. 2 MECU/year costs in stage 2: name/site/country: HFR Petten (The Nether electric power (at operation): lands) 45 MWe residual radioactivity: 3. 7 E13 Bq. (after removal of nuclear fuel) estimated waste arisings for dispo 4 Mg MAW sal (without thermal column): 121 Mg LAW estimated decommissioning costs to 22 MECU (according 4. 2) stage 3 (without demolition of the buildings and other conventional systems): estimated temporary supervision 0. 5 MECU/year costs in stage 2: DETEC Expert Review of the Draft JRC Petten Document on Decommissioning of HFR Petten Schutzvermerk nach DIN 34 beachten 21 DNR RIX 00062610 - 00 Blatt 12 FocmbJatt DE103. DOT / QM / 09. S Therefore on this basis of direct comparison with other decom missioning projects the costs for HFR decommissioning given in the preliminary study seem to be quite plausible. 4. 2 Detailed evaluation Beside checking the costs by plausibility and comparison with other decommissioning projects costs can be proved by an inde pendent and more direct approach. This must include the consi / deration of: extent of dismantling work duration of work amount of masses to be dismantled amount of waste arising material and mass specific dismantling costs planning and licensing extent of and techniques for decontamination handling and disposal of waste plant supervision, auxiliary systems standby, amount of personnel and operating staff. All these aspects were taken into consideration and were eva luated. Corresponding costs were then calculated on basis of existing knowledge and experience. Costs for the following activities are not considered here: Removal of fuel from the reactor site Removal of contaminated coolants and other readily remo vable contaminated and activated materials. As already pointed cut above we assume that extensive use will be made of chemical system decontamination and that such compo nents which are not decontaminated during system decontaminati on will be treated after dismantling. In our opinion a conse- DETEC Expert Review of the Draft JRC Petten Document on Decommissioning of HFR Petten Schutzvermerk nacn DIN 34 beachten DNR RIX 00062610 - 00 Blatt 13 Formbtatt DE103. DOT / QM / 09. 94 quent decontamination strategy can reduce the amount of waste expected in the preliminary study. In addition we presuppose that stage 3 will immediately follow stage 2 so that within a period of 5 years the reactor building will completely be cleared from all components and structures with residual radioactivity above authorized limits. At the end of this time the building will be released from atomic law. The costs thus derived are presented in Table 3. Table 3: Breakdown of costs (status: 01. 01. 1996) Activities System and single component decontamination Decontamination and release measurements of buildings MECU 2. 0 1. 6 Dismantling of medium activated/contaminated 1. 4 components and systems Dismantling of low-contaminated components and 3. 9 systems Operational costs and management Planning and licensing Disposal of waste Total 4. 1 2. 0 7. 0 22. 0 DETEC Expert Review of the Draft JRC Petten Document on Decommissioning of HFR Petten Schutzvermerk nacn DIN 34 beachten ^3 DNR 00062610 Blatt RIX 00 14 Formtotett DE 103. DOT / QM / 09. 94 Costs for planning and licensing were calculated on the basis of German conditions. With respect to HFR this assumption could therefore be a conservative one. We tried to recalculate the amount of waste, and we concluded that about 300 m3 of waste must be expected. Included in these 300 m3 are 1 - 2% of high/medium level waste, mostly arising from activated material. The 300 m3 of low level waste were evaluated on the basis of enhanced decontamination work apply ing advanced decontamination technologies. Assuming that the complete waste volume will finally be dispo sed off at COVRA about 3. 5 MECU must be set aside for a direct disposal of waste. 3ased upon information we received from HFR most likely the me dium/high level waste will need preconditioning prior to be sent to COVRA. Preconditioning costs seem to be somewhat uncer tain and not well established for the time being. We expect to be on the safe side by assuming once again 3. 5 MECU for precon ditioning and intermediate storage. In sum 7. 0 MECU should therefore be sufficient to cover the waste disposal costs. Up tc the end of extended stage 2 (as defined above) overall costs of 22. 0 MECU must therefore be expected. Following our recommendation no temporary supervision costs will arise during stage 3. The assumptions of the preliminary study therefore seem to be formulated on a sound and solid basis. DETEC Expert Review of the Draft JRC Petten Document on Decommissioning of HFR Petten Schutzvermerk nach DIN 34 beachten DNR RIX 00062610 - 00 Blatt 15 Formblatt DE103. DOT / QM / 09. 94 7 Y ISSN 1024-4492 KOM(97) 150 lopullinen ASIAKIRJAT Fï 12 15 14 05 Luettelonumero : CB-CO-97-141-FI-C ISBN 92-78-18093-9 Euroopan yhteisöjen virallisten julkaisujen toimisto L-2985 Luxemburg z. r


title: 97/256/EF: Rådets Afgørelse af 14. april 1997 om en fællesskabsgaranti til Den Europæiske Investeringsbank mod tab i forbindelse med lån til projekter uden for Fællesskabet (De central- og østeuropæiske lande, Middelhavslandene, landene i Latinamerika og Asien samt Sydafrika)

eurovoc_concepts:
EIB loan
European Investment Bank
credit guarantee
financial loss
investment project
third country


title: ΚΑΝΟΝΙΣΜΟΣ (ΕΚ) αριθ. 644/97 ΤΗΣ ΕΠΙΤΡΟΠΗΣ της 14ης Απριλίου 1997 για τροποποίηση των επιστροφών που εφαρμόζονται κατά την εξαγωγή των σιτηρών, των αλεύρων και των πλιγουριών και σιμιγδαλιών σίτου ή σικάλεως

eurovoc_concepts:
cereals
export
export refund
maize


title: KOMMISSIONENS FÖRORDNING (EG) nr 643/97 av den 14 april 1997 om fastställande av schablonvärden vid import för bestämning av ingångspriset för vissa frukter och grönsaker

eurovoc_concepts:
award of contract
export refund
olive oil


text: COMISSÃO DAS COMUNIDADES EUROPEIAS Bruxelas, 14. 04. 1997 COM(97) 150 final RELATÓRIO DA COMISSÃO AO CONSELHO E AO PARLAMENTO EUROPEU sobre as condições a prever para o desmantelamento do Reactor de Alto Fluxo (HFR) de Petten O Conselho adoptou, em 27 de Junho de 1996, o Programa Complementar de Investigação a implementar pelo Centro Comum de Investigação para a Comunidade Europeia da Energia Atómica (1996-99), em conformidade com o artigo 7o do Tratado Euratom. Na adopção do referido programa, foi registada a seguinte declaração na acta do Conselho: "O Conselho toma nota da intenção da Comissão de continuar a constituir uma provisão para a desactivação, tal como já fez em anos anteriores, ao fixar as tarifas de serviços de irradiação Essa provisão virá juntar-se à que já foi fixada e será utilizada oportunamente Além disso, a Comissão examinará a questão da desactivação do HFR e apresentará relatório ao Conselho sobre esta matéria antes do final de 1996. " A Comissão convida o Conselho e o Parlamento a tomar conhecimento do relatório em anexo RELATÓRIO DA COMISSÃO AO CONSELHO E AO PARLAMENTO EUROPEU sobre as condições a prever para o desmantelamento do Reactor de Alto Fluxo (HFR) de Petten Introdução A questão prática da desclassificação não se coloca de forma aguda para o HFR. As condições técnicas em que se encontra o reactor são muito boas, o que foi possivel graças a constantes melhoramentos e à renovação feita a tempo dos seus principais componentes. O tempo de vida residual da presente cuba do reactor - que foi substituída em 1984-1985 e tem um período de vida projectado de 30 anos - permite o funcionamento do HFR até 2015 e talvez mesmo mais, o que será confirmado pelas inspecções de rotina realizadas de três em três anos. Além disso, existe em reserva uma outra cuba de reactor devidamente autorizada - idêntica à presente cuba do HFR - que poderá ser utilizada numa nova operação de substituição da cuba. Assim, por volta do ano 2015, a Comissão poderá escolher entre três opções: - parar o funcionamento do HFR e propor a sua desclassificação; - fazer uma avaliação da situação exacta da cuba e decidir quanto ao prolongamento da vida do reactor com a cuba actual; - na sequência da avaliação da situação da cuba, decidir substituí-la Os Quadros 1 e 2 mostram os calendários de funcionamento a longo prazo do HFR correspondentes à primeira e à terceira destas opções A escolha entre estas opções exigirá um profundo trabalho de concertação com as autoridades responsáveis pela autorização dos Países Baixos, os Estados-membros que apoiem então o HFR e os clientes A decisão será tomada tendo especialmente em conta uma avaliação económica da viabilidade do reactor a efectuar nessa data Por esse motivo, o problema de decidir se deve ou não ser desclassificado o reactor HFR so se colocara a partir do ano 2015 e poderá mesmo não ser levantada antes de meados do proximo século No entanto, independentemente da data em que será tomada essa decisão, as características do HFR permitem fazer uma descrição do processo de desclassificação e avaliar o seu custo Este e o tema do presente documento, que foi submetido à análise de peritos [DETEC, Alemanha] Estes confirmaram a viabilidade da presente proposta e as estimativas quanto aos volumes de resíduos inicialmente previstos (A DETEC é uma empresa reconhecida e de grande experiência no domínio da desclassificação, filial da SIEMENS e da NUKEM) Os comentários dos peritos foram incluídos no relatório da Comissão. Considerámos também ser útil juntar a versão original, em inglês, do relatório técnico da DETEC. -i CX I. Âmbito O presente estudo preliminar tem por objectivo definir as principais fases da desclassificação do HFR em Petten, com base na Safety Series n° 74 "Safety in Decommissioning of Research Reactors" da Agência Internacional da Energia Atómica, Safety Guide, 1986. Faz também referência às medidas previstas para o desmantelamento e a desclassificação do HFR, e dá uma estimativa aproximada das quantidades de resíduos e dos custos associados. II. Fases da desclassificação Considera-se que o processo de desclassificação tem início com o encerramento final do reactor HFR e termina com a restituição do terreno ocupado pelo reactor para toda e qualquer utilização. O processo é formado de três fases: Fase 1 - Armazenagem controlada Durante e após esta fase, é necessária uma vigilância contínua do reactor As principais actividades consistem em: - remoção do combustível - remoção dos refrigerantes e de outros materiais irradiados ou fracamente radioactivos facilmente retiráveis Estas operações são fáceis de efectuar nas instalações existentes no local e com custos razoavelmente baixos lase 2 - Utilização restrita do terreno Depois de concluída a primeira fase, e em consequência das actividades de desclassificação, algumas partes do terreno podem ser recuperadas para utilização, sujeita a limitações, enquanto que as restantes partes do reactor e do terreno serão objecto de armazenagem controlada As principais actividades consistem em - descontaminar todas as areas facilmente descontamináveis - selar fisicamente as restantes areas que contenham radioactividade. Estas actividades devem incluir a remoção da cuba do reactor e de todos os componentes irradiados ou altamente contaminados próximos da cuba, na piscina (tubos de irradiação), no circuito primário, e remoção das partes irradiadas ou contaminadas do revestimento da piscina e das paredes de betão, bem como a selagem de todas as partes que possam ainda conter radioactividade Todas as acções necessárias podem ser efectuadas com pessoal e know-how interno (incluindo o Energiecentrum Nederland - ECN) Os resíduos seriam enviados para a instalação neerlandesa de eliminação COVRA (Centrale Organisatie voor Radioactief AfVal), mesmo que uma pequena parte tenha que ser armazenada temporariamente na instalação para resíduos de actividade média do ECN antes do envio para a instalação COVRA Fase S - Utilização do terreno para todos os fins Nesta fase, está completada a desclassificação do reactor. Todos os materiais radioactivos, equipamento e estruturas foram descontaminados ou transferidos para a instalação neerlandesa de eliminação COVRA. Efectua-se então uma verificação final da radiação, para ter a certeza de que não fica no local nenhuma radioactividade residual. O terreno é depois declarado apto para todo e qualquer tipo de utilização e não são necessárias mais inspecções nem ensaios de rotina. Os edificios e o terreno deixam de estar sujeitos à legislação em matéria nuclear. Depois de desligados da obrigação de respeitar a legislação nuclear, o terreno e os edifícios podem ser utilizados para qualquer fim e dar origem a receitas. Caso contrário, os custos decorrentes da fase 3 serão associados à gestão normal de edifícios de carácter geral. Propõe-se a passagem imediata à fase 3 assim que esteja concluída a fase 2. Segundo os peritos, as vantagens de um processo de desclassificação sem interrupções até ao fim da fase 3 são consideráveis em comparação com um cenário em que se passe à fase 3 após um período de interrupção Custos da desclassificação: - preparação e contactos com as autoridades que emitem a licença: - preparação e execução dos trabalhos (a capacidade deve ser mantida, nos termos do actual contrato com o ECN, cerca de 1,5 anos): - eliminação dos residuos (COVRA) - Total (estimativa aproximada) 2 MECU 14 MECU 9 MECU 25 MECU III. Ordem pela qual serão realizadas as acções As actividades de desactivação do HFR baseiam-se na experiência adquirida com a substituição da cuba em 1984-1985 Toda a operação foi levada a efeito, nessa data, pelo habitual pessoal técnico e de manutenção e com o contributo dos utilizadores do HFR e do grupo de trabalho no local Com base nas quantidades de residuos manipulados durante a substituição da cuba em 1984. a abordagem geral apresenta as seguintes fases: 0. /. Remoção dos elementos de combustível Os elementos de combustível são armazenados em segurança noutro local ou transferidos para uma instalação de reprocessamento Remoção de todo o equipamento auxiliar e mecanismos situados dentro da cuba e na sua proximidade Prevê-se que um equipamento auxiliar muito semelhante dê origem à mesma quantidade de residuos 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Remoção destrutiva de tubos de irradiação e outras ligações "fixas " com a cuba (estruturas de contenção, etc. ) Quantidades iguais deverão ser produzidas pelos tubos de irradiação e outras estruturas "fixas", com uma percentagem um pouco maior de partes de actividade média devido à utilização de cavilhas e anéis em aço inoxidável. A quantidade do material em aço inoxidável é muito pequena devido à ausência de foles. Contudo, há agora uma maior quantidade de materiais de espessura superior a 3cm que devem ser tratados como resíduos especiais. Remoção da cuba A quantidade de material proveniente da própria cuba de pressão será menor, mas de maior espessura. Remoção das partes irradiadas dos tubos de irradiação 11 e 12 e de partes do revestimento da piscina com manchas radioactivas A quantidade de resíduos dos tubos de irradiação 11 e 12 é reduzida devido à simplificação da construção; o material de revestimento da piscina representa 10% do total. Remoção do betão irradiado das paredes da piscina em torno das aberturas de passagem dos tubos de irradiação Assume-se que a "profundidade de penetração" do betão irradiado em torno das aberturas de passagem dos tubos de irradiação é de cerca de 30 cm Remoção do betão contaminado sob o revestimento do fundo da piscina Para o betão situado sob o revestimento do fundo da piscina, que seja contaminado em resultado de fuga, assume-se também uma espessura de 30 cm. Nas paredes verticais, so se suspeita de contaminação do betão situado na proximidade das entradas da piscina 7. Descontaminação extensiva de toda a canalização do sistema primário e de refrigeração da piscina A descontaminação da canalização do sistema primário e de refrigeração da piscina produzira apenas fluidos radioactivos de descontaminação. O material em si mesmo não e radioactivo O mesmo e valido para os sistemas auxiliares como os sistemas de drenagem de agua quente e escaldante X. Remoção de equipamento auxiliar irradiado e ou contaminado (resmas de permuta lonica, utensílios, etc. ) e instalações experimentais normais As quantidades de resinas de permuta ionica são bem conhecidas, e após uma regeneração completa podem ser tratadas como resíduos de fraca actividade. Os utensílios, prateleiras de armazenagem, etc produzirão apenas quantidades mínimas de material fracamente radioactivo após a descontaminação. Para a remoção das instalações experimentais normais, as estimativas são baseadas na situação em 1991. 9. ( \mtrolo radiológico geral das restantes partes do sistema O controlo radiológico final de toda a instalação pode apenas dar origem a quantidades mínimas de residuos fracamente radioactivos. 10. Demolição normal para os níveis exigidos para uma futura utilização das instalações Esta operação aplica-se aos materiais não radioactivos. 4 O Quadro 3 indica as quantidades previstas de resíduos subdivididos por categorias Os resíduos de alta e média actividade podem ser armazenados temporariamente na instalação de resíduos do ECN No caso de transporte e armazenagem na instalação COVRA Borsele, ver Quadro 4. De um modo geral, prevêem-se 5 m" de resíduos de alta e média actividade e 370 TBq (1 000 Ci) e 120 nr de resíduos de fraca actividade e 5,9 TBq (16 Ci) Quadro 1 : Calendário operacional a longo prazo do HFR (1" opção) Período : 1996 a 2030 Ano:19 ou 20 <>6 a (19 10 II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 a 30 Contraio de leasing' CCI. NI Yn. «d. < rcM. inlc d. -. utu. il v. im. it. - ik le i-mi- CCI NI sobre o 111 R e o estabelecimento de Petten Duração d. i uib. i do reactor HI K PCII. KI. - restante de \ ida pteusla da uiba de pressão n' 2 do III R l)eselas. silkav. u-do III R Preparação Fase 1 e 2 1 ase 3 O Período : 2031 a 2065 Ano : 20. 31 a 61 Preparação l 'tilizaçâd do terreno para todos os tins 62 6. 3 64 65 Contrato de "leasing"' CCF. NI. Continuação durante o período restante do actual contrato de "leasing" CCF "NL sobre o HFR e o estabelecimento de Petten Desclassificação do HFR Fase 3 Continuação da utilização do terreno para todos os fins Quadro 2 : Calendário operacional a longo prazo do HFR (3* opção) Período: 1996-2030 A no 19 a 20 «H> a o«) 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 a 30 Contrato de "leasing" CCF. NI IVTKKIO restante d. - actual viitralo de lc. is. un-. CCI. NI sobre o HFR e o estabelecimento de Petten Duração da cuba do react i>r III R Período restante dc \tda prevista da cuba dc pressão n" 2 do HFR Duração prevista da cuba n° 3 (existente) do reactor HFR Sulistnutção da cuba do HFR Preparação Substituição V Período : 2031 - 2065 Preparação Ano : 20. 31 a 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 a61 62 63 64 65 Contrato de "leasing" CCF NI. Continuação do período restante do actual contrato de "leasing" CCE NL sobre o HFR e o estabelecimento de Petten Duração da cuba do reactor HFR IXiração pre\ista da cuba n° 3 do reactor, continuação Desclassificação do HFR Preparação Fase I e 2 Fase 3 Preparação l Hili/ação do terreno para lodos os tins Quadro 3 : Quantidades previstas de residuos : subdivisão por categorias e ou destino Residuos de alto/médio nível radioactivo Resíduos de fraco nível radioactivo Categoria de resíduos Caixas normalizadas de residuos (25 1) contendo Tambores de Alumínio Aço inoxidável kCi 200 1 6001 Cuba e equipamento auxiliar em torno da cuba 180 20 1,0 Betão irradiado Equipamento auxiliar contaminado - - - - - - C*J TOTAL 180 20 1,0 200 220 130 550 20 - - 20 Ci 12 2 2 16 Quadro 4 : Quantidades previstas de residuos a armazenar na instalação COVRA • Número de contentores de betão ! Volume do contentor 200 1 6001 Equivalente de dose/h < 2 mSv/h > 2 mSv/h < 2 mSv/h > 2 mSv/h < 2. 0 mSv/h < 2. 0 mSv/h u> Cuba e equipamento auxiliar em torno da cuba Betão irradiado Equipamento auxiliar contaminado TOTAL 200 150 150 500 - - - - 100 - - 100 100 - - 100 DETEC Bericht Empfànger siehe Verteiler Titel: Expert Review of the Draft JRC Petten Document on Decommissioning of HFR Petten (Summarizing Report) Revision sieh« Revtsionsubersicht ULS Blattzahl Erstdter Datum Prufer Datum Erstausgabe 15 Fretgabe ProjekUeiter _ Datum :*^Ghq* Utffcf RIX ubergeofdnetes Dokument ProfeW-Nr. UVST ACK DN 1 5 4 0 09 DE140 DNR 00062610 -00 Funktton Komponente Baugaippe Bau EB Lfd. Nr. AG UA DETEC Irtefne Kennzachnung: r n er r. umne: 5025005 u BE BUG Schutzvermerk nach DIN 34 beachten Formbtatt DE110. DOT / QM / 09. 94 / )o Revisionsûbersicht Blatt Beschreibung der Ânderung a ll F i r st i s s ue R1X / Datum 0 0 / 2 9. 0 8. 96 DETEC Expert Review of the Draft JRC Petten Document on Decommissioning of HFR Petten Schutzvermerk naefc DIN 34 beachten ï 0 DNR 00062610 RIX - 00 Blatt Formbtatt DE102. DOT / QM / 09. 9* Contents Abstract 1 Scope 2 Assumptions 3 Review of technical concept 4 Review of costs 4. 1 Plausibility check 4. 2 Detailed evaluation p a ge 10 10 13 DETEC Expert Review of the Draft JRC Petten Document on Decommissioning of HFR Petten Schutzvermerk nach DIN 34 beachten 4L DNR 00062610 RIX 00 Blatt Formbtatt DE103. DOT / QM / 09. 9- Abstract The intention of the expert review is to check the feasibility of the technical concept and the plausibility of the estimated costs. A comparison of HFR with 3 German research reactors actually in the state of decommissioning leads to the result that the cal culated amounts of waste and costs seem to be in a reasonable order of magnitude if one takes into account: the comparatively low residual radioactivity of the HFR the comparatively low estimated waste arisings low estimated decommissioning and temporary supervision costs. The results obtained by a plausibility check were subsequently confirmed by an independent detailed calculation. Total costs for decommissioning to free release (directly following stage 2) should therefore not exceed 25 MECU. Weighing the pros and cons for decommissioning as planned, it becomes apparent that there are hardly any pros left for a long time phase of supervision following stage 2. r. adioactive decay, the argument often used in favour of defer ring stage 3, is of no significant importance. A dormancy peri- Da of several decades will not improve the contamination situa tion substantially and will therefore not lighten the dismant ling work decisively. Conversely, the advantages of immediate decommissioning to un restricted release of the controlled areas are obvious: • Auxiliary systems that will be needed for decommissioning are either still in operating condition or can be kept ope rational. Deferred dismantling would require new installa tions with all implications (such as licensing). DETEC Expert Review of the Draft JRC Petten Document on Decommissioning of HFR Petten Schutzvermerk nach DIN 34 beacfiten 4 J DNR RIX 00062610 - 00 Blatt Formbtatt DE103. DOT / QM / 09. 9- Costs for sampling and waste management (decontamination, waste conditioning) can be kept low as long as neighbouring JRC still has appropriate facilities at its disposal. This might not be the case several decades after decommissioning to stage 2. The availability of experienced HFF>, staff and of personnel with specific HFR knowledge at -authorities and in industry. That knowledge is about to disappear gradually. DETEC Expert Review of the Draft JRC Petten Document on Decommissioning of HFR Petten Schutzvermerk nach DIN 34 beachten * V DNR 00062610 RIX - 00 Blatt Formbtatt DE103. DOT / QM / 09. Í Scope The Institute for Advanced Materials, HFR Unit, at Petten has prepared a preliminary study about the decommissioning of the High Flux Reactor (HFR) at Petten. The study is based on IAEA Safety Series no. 74 „Safety in De commissioning of Research Reactors", Safety Guide, 1986. It estimates expected costs for reactor dismantling including amounts of waste and costs of waste disposal. It is the intention of the expert review to check the feasibi lity of the technical concept and the plausibility of the esti mated costs. 2 Assumptions The expert review is based upon the following assumptions: - decommissioning of HFR will be performed in accordance with IAEA Safety Series no. 74. after decontamination and dismantling of contaminated and activated areas and components the buildings will be re turnee to the former owner for unrestricted site use. - -osi dismantling work will be performed by the HFR operating staff. aii costs are calculated on 1996 price level. DETEC Expert Review of the Draft JRC Petten Document on Decommissioning of HFR Petten Schutzvermerk nach DIN 34 beacrrten DNR RIX 00062610 - 00 Blatt Formbtatt DE103. DOT/QM/ 09. 94 1 J 3 Review of technical concept. The IAEA Safety Series no. 74 recommends decommissioning by three stages: stage 1 includes the removal of fuel and all other removable contaminated and activated material like for example • cooling water. stage 2 comprises decontamination and disassembly of such areas and components which can be quite easily trea ted and removed like the reactor vessel. In stage 2 it is intended to remove the main part of activity and to achieve unrestricted release conditi ons for large building areas. Those areas which can not easily be cleaned from activity will be sealed and will remain as restricted use areas for perhaps a long period of time. stage 3 finally will consist in removing all the remaining contamination and activation and will terminate the decommissioning by unrestricted release of the com plete facility. The HFR preliminary study strictly follows these recommendati ons. It must be mentioned that the IAEA Safety Series no. 74 is no binding regulation but a guide which explicitely admits depar tures from the recommended strategy. 3y the experience of decommissioning German research reactors e. g. AT/R, FR-2 and MZFR) a 3-stage strategy guided by the gra- ze of technical complexity and by the radiological demands is a "ery reasonable approach to decommissioning. But we do not fol low the idea to keep the facility within stage 2 for perhaps DETEC Expert Review of the Draft JRC Petten Document on Decommissioning of HFR Petten Schutzvermerk nach DIN 34 beacrrten DNR RIX 00062610 - 00 Blatt I Formbtatt DE103. DOT / QM / 09. 94 some ten years, an idea which at least is implicitely included in this concept. By nearly all actual decommissioning projects it can be learned that direct and immediate dismantling is the most effective way. This can be supported by mainly two arguments: until completion of stage 3 at least some auxiliary systems like ventilation and off-gas systems must be kept working. This will cause costs. - practical experience demonstrates the need for operating staff availability during all stages of decommissioning. Se veral decades after shut down it cannot be expected that ex perienced operating personnel from the facility will still be at hand. This situation will then also give rise to addi tional costs. Taking into account the development of waste disposal costs it must be an additional argument to complete the work as soon as possible - once the decision for final shut down has been ta ken. r/Je therefore strongly recommend to perform the decommissioning stage-wise but without long interruptions between different stages. The Decommissioning sequence described in chapter III of the HFR preliminary study seems to be reasonable but with one exception: decontamination of the primary system and pool coo ling system (item 7) should be performed right at the beginning of the decommissioning work. To be precise: decontamination should be foreseen directly after item 1. Decontamination of the primary and pool coolant loop system should be performed with Full System Chemical Decontamination (FSD). Highly efficient closed loop processes of this kind also DETEC Expert Review of the Draft JRC Petten Document on Decommissioning of HFR Petten Schutzvermerk nach DIN 34 beacrrten DNR RIX 00062610 - 00 Blatt 8 Formbtatt DE103. DOT / QM / 09. 9- 1 =) for aluminum are available. Such a process will decontaminate large system areas fairly down below the limit values for mate rial free release. Appropriate processes are available which are strongly waste minimizing. Ion exchange resins which contain the total amount of activity and of kations will be the only secondary waste re sulting from such processes. Decontamination chemicals are com pletely decomposed within the process and will not contribute to the waste volume. FSD will not only help to save dose rate during system dismant ling but will also help to save costs because the complete sy stem will be decontaminated in one single working operation and most of the material can afterwards be reused unrestrictedly. The application of FSD presupposes an intact system to be de contaminated which is an additional demand for performing this process at an early stage of decommissioning. After FSD of primary system and pool cooling loops the pool it self should be decontaminated by standard chemical spraying. We nave based our cost review on a decontamination strategy just outlined above. DETEC Expert Review of the Draft JRC Petten Document on Decommissioning of HFR Petten Schutzvermerk nach DIN 34 beachten DNR RIX 00062610 - 00 Blatt Formbtatt DE103. DOT / QM / 09. S •1 % 4 Review of costs 4. 1 Plausibility check The preliminary study gives a rough estimate for HFR waste arisings and decommissioning costs. For an overall plausibility check it is helpful to compare data of HFR with corresponding data of other research reactors. For this comparison German re search reactors of different types were chosen. Their electric power is of the same order of magnitude like HFR and actually they are in the state of decommissioning. For these comparative reactors the decomissioning will also be terminated by unre stricted release of the controlled areas. Details are shown in the following Tables 1 and 2. The cost data of the reactors •status: January 1995) are based upon a BMBF publication. In our opinion the data of waste amount and costs given in the Tables for HFR fit together with the 3 other projects in a reasonable manner if one takes into account: the comparatively low residual radioactivity of the HFR, which is due to the very compact design of the high flux reactor and the material aluminum (already experienced during the reac tor vessel dismantling campaign in 1984), the comparatively low estimated waste arising with decom missioning of HFR, which is a direct consequence of the low residual radioactivity, the low estimated decommissioning costs, which are directly depending upon the low waste arisings, the assumed availability of the operating staff and again the low residual radioactivity which both contribute to low temporary supervision costs. DETEC Expert Review of the Draft JRC Petten Document on Decommissioning of HFR Petten DNR RIX 00062610 - 00 Blatt 10 Formbtatt DE103. DOT / QM / 09. 9* Schutzvermerk nach DIN 34 beactrten *5 Table 1: Drawing up of relevant data of research reactors (DM/ECU = 1. 85) name/site/country: AVR Julien (Germany) electric power (at operation) : 15 MWe residual radioactivity: 2. 6 E15 Bq (after removal of nuclear fuel) estimated waste arisings for dispo 668 Mg steel sal: 2000 Mg concrete 1015 Mg other materials estimated decommissioning costs to 193 MECU stage 3: estimated temporary supervision 11 MECU/year costs in stage 1: name/site/country: FR-2 Karlsruhe (Germany) electric power (at operation): 44 MWe residual radioactivity: 6. 5 E15 Bq (after removal of nuclear fuel) estimated waste arisings for dispo 1200 Mg total sal without thermal column): estimated decommissioning costs to 132 MECU stage 3: estimated temporary supervision 2. 4 MECU/year costs in stage 2: DETEC Expert Review of the Draft JRC Petten Document on Decommissioning of HFR Petten SchutzvermerK nacn DIN 34 beachten £o DNR 00062610 RIX 00 Blatt 11 Formbtatt DE103. DOT / QM / 09. & Table 2: Drawing up of relevant data of research reactors (DM/ECU = 1. 85) name/site/country: MZFR Karlsruhe (Germany) electric power (at operation): 58 MWe residual radioactivity: 1 E17 Bq (after removal of nuclear fuel) estimated waste arisings for dispo 1580 Mg steel sal : 1080 Mg concrete 100 Mg other materials estimated decommissioning costs to 237 MECU stage 3: estimated temporary supervision 4. 2 MECU/year costs in stage 2: name/site/country: HFR Petten (The Nether electric power (at operation): lands) 45 MWe residual radioactivity: 3. 7 E13 Bq. (after removal of nuclear fuel) estimated waste arisings for dispo 4 Mg MAW sal (without thermal column): 121 Mg LAW estimated decommissioning costs to 22 MECU (according 4. 2 stage 3 (without demolition of the buildings and other conventional systems): estimated temporary supervision 0. 5 MECU/year costs in stage 2: DETEC Expert Review of the Draft JRC Petten Document on Decommissioning of HFR Petten Schutzvermerk nach DIN 34 beacnten DNR 00062610 RIX - 00 Blatt 12 Formbtatt DE103. DOT / QM / 09. 5 2-1 Therefore on this basis of direct comparison with other decom missioning projects the costs for HFR decommissioning given in the preliminary study seem to be quite plausible. 4. 2 Detailed evaluation Beside checking the costs by plausibility and comparison with other decommissioning projects costs can be proved by an inde pendent and more direct approach. This must include the consi deration of: extent of dismantling work duration of work amount of masses to be dismantled amount of waste arising material and mass specific dismantling costs planning and licensing extent of and techniques for decontamination handling and disposal of waste plant supervision, auxiliary systems standby, amount of personnel and operating staff. Ail these aspects were taken into consideration and were eva luated. Corresponding costs were then calculated on basis of existing knowledge and experience. Costs for the following activities are not considered here: Removal of fuel from the reactor site Removal of contaminated coolants and other readily remo vable contaminated ana activated materials. As already pointed cut above we assume that extensive use will oe made of chemical system decontamination and that such compo nents which are not decontaminated during system decontaminati on will be treated after dismantling. In our opinion a conse- DETEC Expert Review of the Draft JRC Petten Document on Decommissioning of HFR Petten Schutzvermerk nacn DIN 34 beacrrten DNR RIX 00062610 - 00 Blatt 13 Formbtatt DE103. DOT / QM / 09. 9* quent decontamination strategy can reduce the amount of waste expected in the preliminary study. In addition we presuppose that stage 3 will immediately follow stage 2 so that within a period of 5 years the reactor building will completely be cleared from all components and structures with residual radioactivity above authorized limits. At the end of this time the building will be released from atomic law. The costs thus derived are presented in Table 3. Table 3: Breakdown of costs (status: 01. 01. 1996) Activities System and single component decontamination Decontamination and release measurements of buildings Dismantling of medium activated/contaminated components and systems MECU 2. 0 1. 6 1. 4 Dismantling of low-contaminated components and 3. 9 systems Operational costs and management Planning and licensing Disposal of waste Total 4. 1 2. 0 7. 0 22. 0 DETEC Expert Review of the Draft JRC Petten Document on Decommissioning of HFR Petten Schutzvermerk nacn DIN 34 beacriten 23 DNR 00062610 Blatt RIX 00 14 Formbtatt DE103. DOT / QM / 09. 94 Costs for planning and licensing were calculated on the basis of German conditions. With respect to HFR this assumption could therefore be a conservative one. We tried to recalculate the amount of waste, and we concluded that about 300 m3 of waste must be expected. Included in these 300 m3 are 1 - 2% of high/medium level waste, mostly arising from activated material. The 300 m3 of low level waste were evaluated on the basis of enhanced decontamination work apply ing advanced decontamination technologies. Assuming that the complete waste volume will finally be dispo sed off at COVRA about 3. 5 MECU must be set aside for a direct disposal of waste. 3ased upon information we received from HFR most likely the me dium/high level waste will need preconditioning prior to be sent to COVRA. Preconditioning costs seem to be somewhat uncer tain and not well established for the time being. We expect to be on the safe side by assuming once again 3. 5 MECU for precon ditioning and intermediate storage. In sum 7. 0 MECU should therefore be sufficient to cover the waste disposal costs. Up to the end of extended stage 2 (as defined above) overall costs of 22. 0 MECU must therefore be expected. Following our recommendation no temporary supervision costs will arise during stage 3. The assumptions of the preliminary study therefore seem to be formulated on a sound and solid basis. DETEC Expert Review of the Draft JRC Petten Document on Decommissioning of HFR Petten Schutzvermerk nacri DIN 34 beachten DNR RIX 00062610 - 00 Blatt 15 Formbtatt DE103. DOT/QM/ 09. 94 2 Y ISSN 0257-9553 COM(97) 150 final DOCUMENTOS PT 12 15 14 05 N. ° de catálogo ; CB-CO-97-141-PT-C ISBN 92-78-18092-0 Serviço das Publicações Oficiais das Comunidades Europeias L-2985 Luxemburgo 2 S"


title: Regolamento (CE) n. 701/97 del Consiglio del 14 aprile 1997 recante adozione di un programma destinato a promuovere la cooperazione internazionale nel settore energetico - Programma Synergy


title: 97/254/EC: Council Decision of 14 April 1997 appointing an alternate member of the Committee of the Regions

eurovoc_concepts:
European Committee of the Regions
Spain
appointment of staff


title: GEMEENSCHAPPELIJK STANDPUNT (EG) Nr. 23/97 door de Raad vastgesteld op 14 april 1997 met het oog op de aanneming van Verordening (EG) Nr. .../97 van de Raad van ... over versterking van het toezicht op begrotingssituaties en het toezicht op en de coördinatie van het economisch beleid

eurovoc_concepts:
Community budget
Economic and Monetary Union
coordination of EMU policies
economic convergence
economic policy
multilateral surveillance


title: Κανονισμός (ΕΚ) αριθ. 641/97 της Επιτροπής της 14ης Απριλίου 1997 για τροποποίηση του κανονισμού (ΕΚ) αριθ. 1249/96 για τις λεπτομέρειες εφαρμογής του κανονισμού (ΕΟΚ) αριθ. 1766/92 του Συμβουλίου όσον αφορά τους εισαγωγικούς δασμούς στον τομέα των σιτηρών


title: Reglamento (CE) nº 701/97 del Consejo de 14 de abril de 1997 por el que se aprueba un programa destinado a fomentar la cooperación internacional en el sector de la energía - programa Synergy


title: 97/256/EG: Beschluss des Rates vom 14. April 1997 über eine Garantieleistung der Gemeinschaft für etwaige Verluste der Europäischen Investitionsbank aus Darlehen für Vorhaben in Drittländern (Mittel- und osteuropäische Länder, Mittelmeerländer, Länder Lateinamerikas und Asiens sowie Südafrika)