nuclear-news

Two legal actions against the hasty commissioning of Flamanville nuclear reactor

Flamanville EPR, still at the heart of scandals, is heading towards a hasty start,

Sortir du Nucleaire, CRIIRAD, CRILAN, Global Chance, Robin des Bois, and the “Exit from Nuclear Power” Network,23 July 24

On May 7, 2024, we denounced the decision to commission the Flamanville EPR. Today, we are raising the alarm through two legal actions about this hasty commissioning while questions remain unanswered. We are filing an appeal with the Council of State against this commissioning decision, and a complaint against X in order to shed full light on the irregularities noted by the Nuclear Safety Authority on parts of the EPR.

We are filing an appeal against the hasty commissioning of the EPR to the detriment of safety requirements

On 7 May 2024, the Nuclear Safety Authority (ASN) gave its approval for the Flamanville EPR to be commissioned, i.e. for it to receive its first fuel load. A decision taken above all to avoid the legal consequences of yet another postponement. Indeed, the commissioning of the Flamanville EPR has already been postponed by decree twice in the past , in 2017 and 2020 , because the facility was not ready to start up.

One might have thought that these two postponements would provide EDF with a comfortable margin to ensure that its installation could start up safely in 2024. However, 
despite the additional time granted to the operator, it has not managed to commission the Flamanville EPR within the allotted time:

The nuclear reactor should have been commissioned before April 10, 2024, according to the creation authorization decree. It finally took place almost a month later, on May 7, 2024. Problem: the commissioning deadlines exist to protect the population and the environment from a project that has become too old. It was 
the ASN itself that indicated in an opinion that these deadlines aim to 
“avoid the commissioning of an installation whose environment would no longer be compatible with its operation and/or not to allow the creation authorization to continue for an installation whose operator would not be able to complete construction” .

The deadline for examining the commissioning application, which can last one or two years if the file is complex, was also not respected. …………………………………………

We are filing a complaint to shed light on the irregularities noted on certain parts of the EPR

This decision to put it into service is even more surprising in light of the revelations of the ASN, which, during its 2024 press wishes, revealed new problems of counterfeiting, falsification and suspicion of fraud (CFS) .  [ 1 ]

These cases, according to the ASN, are distinguished by the significant scope of materials potentially affected, as well as by the potentially significant consequences for the safety of the reactors . The Nuclear Safety Authority has therefore reported these facts to the courts and has since refused to give us further information under cover of the confidentiality of the investigation  [ 2 ] .

It was an 
article from Reporterre that allowed us to obtain more information on this affair and learned that these cases concerned, among others, two companies producing materials intended for the EPR reactor in Flamanville. The article states that 
“it was during the examination of the EPR commissioning authorization [that the ASN] allegedly noted irregularities in certificates of conformity, particularly for valves, pipes, etc.”

At this point, with the elements we have, we can ask ourselves:

• Have components that do not comply with essential safety requirements been placed on the market?
• Were false documents drawn up and used to cover up these defects?
• Did EDF properly monitor its suppliers to prevent the installation of non-compliant parts on its EPR?

We demand answers to these questions………………………………………………………………….more https://www.sortirdunucleaire.org/L-EPR-de-Flamanville-toujours-au-coeur-de

July 29, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | France, Legal | Leave a comment