원자력발전소의 계속운전에 관한 법적쟁점

The permanent shutdown of Gori 1, Korea’s first commercial nuclear reactor, was approved by the Nuclear Safety and Security Commission in early June of 2017. Several days after, President Moon announced his plans for the phase-out policy due to its safety concerns. There would be no longer new nuclear power reactors and the operating periods of existing units would not be extended beyond its original design plant life. As the two political parties have different opinion on the future of NPPs including continuous operation, the industry players have similar anxieties. In regards to this, there are certain issues that need to be reviewed. First, it should be clarified that whether the phase-out policy can be decided by the government. The government has authority to plan energy policy for common goods, however, in order to restrict basic natural right such as freedom of occupation, there should be the enactment of legislation procedure in advance. Second, the meaning of ‘continuous operation application period’ scheduled by Article 36, Paragraph (4) of the Enforcement Decree of the Nuclear Safety Act is uncertain. According to this decree, an applicant shall submit the continuous operation application at latest two years before the expiration date of design plant life, however, this is merely a technical schedule to guarantee a sufficient time to review application documents. Third, the question arises whether ‘continuous operation’ is possible even after the reactor is permanently shut-down. According to French environmental law, it is not permissible to return to operation state after the permanent shut-down. Under the Nuclear Safety Act, there is no fixed period for operating permits. However, the permits are based on U.S. practice which does have fixed period with renewal. In addition to this, the current legislation adopts Regulatory Method of Periodical Safety Assessment that links with long-term operation, which is based on French legislation. This means that the legislators did not simply introduce or combined the regulation of foreign law, but designed independent legislation in consideration of social acceptability. Nevertheless, as independent legislation has not been enacted on the basis of full consideration especially on limitation of permits, the Nuclear Safety Act causes unnecessary debates.