In the assessment, STUK evaluates whether Fennovoima is able to construct its planned nuclear power plant to fulfill the Finnish safety requirements and whether Fennovoima is able to ensure the safety of the nuclear power station.

In the Preliminary Safety Assessment issued today, STUK has concentrated on the things that have changed after the original decision-in-principle process four years ago. The biggest changes have been the change of the plant type to the Russian Rosatom AES-2006 plant, the withdrawal of E.ON and the entry of Rosatom as one of the owners. STUK is of the opinion that these changes have materially affected the progress of the project as well as the development of Fennovoima’s organization, resources and operations.

The plant can be constructed as a safe plant

STUK states that the AES-2006 plant can be constructed to fulfill the Finnish safety requirements at the location specified by Fennovoima: Hanhikivi at Pyhäjoki. In the Preliminary Safety Assessment, STUK pays attention to issues where changes are required to the design of the plant in order to meet Finnish safety requirements. Such issues are the measures against an aircraft collision, internal flooding and fires, as well as severe accident management. STUK has also identified other technical details that require additional analyses or tests during the construction licence (CL) phase.

Fennovoima must strengthen its expertise

The management of the design to fulfil the safety requirements and production of the documentation for STUK requires expertise and actions from Fennovoima already before the next phase of the permit process, which is the submission of a construction licence application. In STUK’s opinion, Fennovoima must strengthen its expertise and develop its management system in order to gain the necessary ability to assess and ensure the safety of the new nuclear power plant and to produce and submit to STUK the materials needed for the construction licence.

In the statement to the Ministry of Employment and the Economy, STUK questions Fennovoima’s ability to submit comprehensive documentation to STUK at the same time it submits an application for a construction licence to the Government. STUK states that this must be taken into account when planning the collection and schedule of materials to be submitted to STUK at the construction licence phase, and when estimating the duration of the construction licence phase.