B4-0212, 0240, 0269, 0277, 0284 and 0295/95

Resolution on the Mochovce project

The European Parliament,

A.aware of the European Union's financial undertakings (Euratom, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) and the European Investment Bank) for the completion of the Slovak nuclear power station at Mochovce,

B.noting the position on Mochovce of its Committee on Research, Technological Development and Energy and the letter sent by the chairman of its Environment Committee on its behalf to the EBRD and the Commission,

C.aware of the conditions the EBRD established for the granting of a credit,

D.pointing in particular to the failure of the public hearing on safety questions, which is obligatory, according to the conditions laid down, if a credit is to be granted,

E.having regard to the disastrous safety conditions of the plant (no insulation, rusted-through material, inefficient fire precautions, etc.) which - as is proved by various studies - cannot be improved sufficiently, even if Western technology is used,

F.whereas the planned upgrading of a VVER-440/W-213 reactor has never been tested anywhere; whereas the German authorities decided against such a move in the case of the Greifswald nuclear power plant because of the danger and because it would not be economic,

G.aware of the scientific discussion which is dominated by serious doubts about the successful operation of mixed Russian and Western safety technology;

H.whereas neither the borrowers nor the French and German companies which are taking part in the project have adequately met either the justified requirements for public participation or the requirements for detailed information,

I.whereas the EBRD considers the smooth functioning of this request for credit as a test for a hundred other similar projects in Central and Eastern European countries (CEEC) and whereas already, in its planning phase, this 'pilot project' shows irresponsible weaknesses,

J.whereas it cannot be certain that the DM 1.3 billion envisaged for the project will be sufficient to implement Western safety standards in Mochovce,

K.whereas there is no real necessity to start operating the nuclear power plant at Mochovce at all because the energy requirements of the Slovak Republic can be easily and much more ecologically covered through other methods, namely by promoting energy efficiency,

L.whereas more than 700 000 signatures have been collected by Austrian EU citizens against the project and whereas the Austrian Government has officially stated its total opposition,

1.Demands that the Commission and the EBRD make public the full dossier of Mochovce including the economic, environmental and safety studies, as well as the least-cost planning;

2.Notes that its Committees on Research, Technological Development and Energy, on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Protection and on Budgetary Control are to organize a public hearing on 1 March 1995;

3.Calls for the appropriations for the completion of the Mochovce nuclear power station not to be granted by the EBRD until the safety issues have been satisfactorily resolved, and asks the Commission, the EBRD and the EIB to postpone their decision;

4.States firmly its conviction that safety is not a 'tradeable' issue and that in no case should a lowering of European safety standards be considered, especially in new European sponsored projects;

5.Calls for an ad hoc delegation to be sent to Mochovce, and subsequently to make a report to Parliament in plenary;

6.Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Commission, the Council, the governments of the Member States, the EBRD, the EIB and the Union Members of the Board of the two banks.