Explanatory Memorandum to COM(2004)526 - Basic obligations and general principles on the safety of nuclear installations - Main contents
Please note
This page contains a limited version of this dossier in the EU Monitor.
| dossier | COM(2004)526 - Basic obligations and general principles on the safety of nuclear installations. |
|---|---|
| source | COM(2004)526  |
| date | 08-09-2004 |
On 30 January 2003, the Commission adopted two proposals for Directives dealing respectively with the safety of nuclear facilities and the management of spent fuel and radioactive waste i. The legal bases of these two proposals are in Chapter 3 of the Euratom Treaty, which concerns health protection.
After the European Economic and Social Committee gave its opinion on 27 March 2003, both proposals were forwarded to the Council on 2 May 2003. In accordance with the procedure in Article 31 of the Euratom Treaty, the Council requested the opinion of the European Parliament. The European Parliament adopted opinions on the proposals in its plenary session on 13 January 2004.
The opinion of the European Parliament supports the approach taken by the Commission of endowing the enlarged European Union with binding legislation in the field of safety of nuclear facilities and of radioactive waste management. Parliament adopted a number of amendments, the majority of which are acceptable to the Commission. At the same time, both proposals were discussed in Council under the Italian and Irish Presidencies. Texts evolved which did not deviate from the political targets that the Commission had set itself in adopting the proposals.
In addition to the consultations resulting from the legislative procedure provided for in the Euratom Treaty, the Commission carried out numerous consultations, with both the national authorities and industries concerned with its proposals, individually or collectively through various fora, before the submission of the proposals for Directives and during their examination process. Consultations were also undertaken with international organizations, such as the International Atomic Energy Agency and the Nuclear Energy Agency.
The Commission took also advantage of its participation in various international meetings to present its legislative proposals. In this regard, the proposals were presented and discussed in various meetings organized not only within Member States but also with third States. These meetings made it possible to describe the evolution of both proposals for Directives throughout the discussion process with the European Parliament and the Council.
2. Nature of the amendments
The main amendments adopted by the European Parliament concern the following points:
2.1. Proposal for a Directive in the field of safety of nuclear facilities
The main request of the European Parliament concerns the financing of the decommissioning of nuclear facilities. The expectations of the Parliament are very large on this matter, as the inter-institutional agreement concluded on 26 June 2003 i, at the time of the adoption of the Directive on common rules for the internal electricity market testifies. This agreement stresses the need for the Member States to ensure that adequate financial resources for the decommissioning of nuclear facilities are available and can be used only to this end.
The European Parliament pointed out that there exists among Member States a diversity of methods to finance decommissioning operations. This diversity can lead to distortions of competition and to discriminations between the producers of nuclear power. The Commission had stressed during the debates in the European Parliament the importance of this question in the context of the internal market of electricity. It stated however that it had to be addressed through the means of appropriate Community instruments and not through the directive on the common rules for the internal market of electricity. The Commission considered in this respect that the Euratom Treaty offered a suitable framework.
To meet the expectations of Parliament, it would be necessary to insert a provision in paragraph 2 of Article 9 aiming to guarantee the availability of financial resources and their assignment to decommissioning. In view of the opposition of a majority of Member States, in the Council, to the adoption of a substantial provision in this field, it is proposed to give up this provision under the Directive on nuclear safety. The Commission reserves for itself the possibility to quickly submit any suitable alternative initiative, without excluding the E.C. Treaty.
The other amendments of the European Parliament which are acceptable to the Commission already appear, to a large extent, in the compromise text of the Council.
2.2. Proposal for a Directive on radioactive waste management
The main amendments of the European Parliament acceptable to the Commission concern methods of public information and provisions concerning research and development. The current text of the Council already incorporates these elements to a large degree, except for the amendments concerning research on radioactive waste management, which therefore necessitate the introduction of a new article in the proposal. However, it is not necessary to maintain a reference to the possibility of creating a Joint undertaking. Indeed, certain Member States are hostile to the mentioning of this possibility in the Directive. In any event, the Euratom Treaty already gives this possibility.
It is important to stress that in its amendments, the European Parliament suppressed the Community timetable concept for the authorizations of development and operation of final disposal sites. Member States are free to determine their own dates. The discussions in the Council, in addition, showed clearly that Member States are deeply hostile to the Community timetable concept for final disposal. The safety authorities of the Member States consider that respect of such a timetable could, in certain cases, compel them to grant an authorization which would not be in conformity with their technical assessment of the safety of a disposal site. A more flexible system leaving the Member States free to fix their own dates, with respect of timetables based on the peer pressure, such as in IAEA conventions, appears therefore preferable and corresponds to the position of the European Parliament.
3. Conclusion
The amendments adopted by the European Parliament and acceptable by the Commission do not alter the political targets that the Commission set itself on 30 January 2003 in adopting both proposals for Directives.
A Community intervention is indispensable to guarantee the maintenance of a high level of nuclear safety within the enlarged European Union. The international conventions in the field of the safety of nuclear facilities and of the management of irradiated fuels and of radioactive waste are certainly legally binding for their contracting parties, but they remain inciting by nature. They do not set up any mechanism to ensure that the obligations which result from them are respected. They do not have the same effectiveness as a Community intervention and cannot therefore be considered as a substitute. The absence of Community legislation would be, in addition, prejudicial to Community citizens and to the interest of the enlarged European Union.
These revised proposals are the occasion for the Commission to give its assent on certain amendments brought by the European Parliament, but also on the developments of the texts following the discussions within the Council.