Endesa has signed on Tuesday morning the protocol for the gradual closure of nuclear power plants with National Waste Company (Enresa) that had already signed last week Iberdrola and Naturgy. But nevertheless, in the afternoon he refused to do so at the shareholders' meeting of the Almaraz plant considering that its partners (Iberdrola and Naturgy) wanted to impose some requirements that were not contemplated in the extension agreement of the two nuclear plants. This must be done before the deadline expires on March 31. However, the three partners will negotiate again on March 19.
The three electrical partners in Almaraz -Iberdrola (53%), Endesa (36%) and Naturgy (11%) -, who could not agree after seven hours of meeting, must decide the conditions for the renewal of the exploitation permit of the two reactors of the Extremadura plant according to the protocol signed with the waste company.
According to the agreed roadmap, the Almaraz 1 reactor will stop not before 2027, while the second of its reactors would do it a year later (2028). Specifically, it assumes that the owners of the Cacereña plant should ask for another 7.4 years, starting in April 2020, when the license expires, for the first reactor and 8.3 years for the second. Therefore, next March 31 is the deadline to make the decision on the matter, under threat to the energy to face a penalty.
According to Endesa sources, their representatives did not want to express their agreement because they did not agree with the claims of Iberdrola and Naturgy to make only the recurrent investments to maintain the operation during the years of expansion and not excessive. Endesa argues that the investments must be decided by the Nuclear Safety Council (CSN) and not the owners, as their partners in the plant say.
In his opinion, the conditions stated by the CSN, which fixed the investments and revisions that the plant had to make in order to continue operating during this period when giving authorization, have never been affected. In this regard, Endesa has expressed its desire to include a clause that allows it to desist in the future and underlined that it should be included in the minutes that intend to extend the useful life up to 10 years and not the 7.4 and 8.3 pick up