Nuclear Package

Nuclear Legislation Package
Overview of Key Stages
in EU Institutions

European Commission

On 6 November 2002, the European Commission published a ‘nuclear package’ consisting of different legislative proposals:

• a draft Proposal for a framework Directive defining the basic obligations and general principles concerning the safety of nuclear installations during operation and decommissioning;

• a draft Proposal for a Directive on radioactive waste; and

• a draft Decision authorising the Commission to negotiate an agreement between Euratom and the Russian Federation on trade in nuclear materials. (This draft Decision was adopted by the European Council on 6 November 2002.)

On 19 December 2002, the Committee established in terms of Article 31 of the Euratom treaty, comprising national experts in radiation protection, issued its opinion on the ‘nuclear package’. The main points of this opinion were:

• the Committee welcomed the Directives as an important move towards enhancing radiation protection in the EU and endorsed the Commission’s overall approach.

• some concern was expressed by the Committee that the Directives might limit the policy options of EU member states (especially regarding radioactive waste and the possibility of using interim storage methods for longer than envisaged in the draft Directive on radioactive waste).

• the Committee declared itself not competent to judge the legal basis of the Directives, and therefore posed neither objection nor support on legal grounds.

A European Court of Justice ruling of 10 December 2002, confirmed the Community's legislative powers with regard to the safety of nuclear facilities.

On 30 January 2003, the European Commission adopted the two proposals for Directives, designed to pave the way for a Community approach to the safety of nuclear power plants and the final management of radioactive waste.

European Economic and Social Committee

In February 2003, the two proposals for Directives were sent to the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) for an Opinion. The Opinion of the Committee, a consultative assembly in which the various socio-economic organisations of the EU member states are represented, was a key stage in the progress of the package. This is because the Commission is only able to adopt a proposal for submission to the Council (ministers and heads of government) after it has obtained the opinion of the EESC.

Professor Wolf (formerly at the Jülich Research Centre) was appointed EESC Rapporteur on the nuclear package.

The 40 members of the EESC section for Transport, Energy, Infrastructure and the Information Society (TEN) discussed and voted on a series of amendments to Prof. Wolf’s opinion at a meeting on 13 March 2003. No fundamental changes were made to the main messages of the Wolf report. As a result, the report still generally welcomed the package and agreed with the views put forward by the European nuclear industry on two key points.

• decommissioning funds: Prof. Wolf pointed out that most of the member states already have effective systems for establishing appropriate funds, and he recommends that operators and member states should be allowed to decide between themselves on the most suitable method of securing funds.

• nuclear safety standards: Prof. Wolf proposed relying on existing IAEA safety guidelines and standards, rather than creating additional EU nuclear safety standards.

The TEN section adopted the report with only one vote against and three abstentions. The EESC, as a whole, adopted it by an overwhelming majority at a plenary session on 26 March 2003.

European Parliament

According to Title II, Chapter 3, Article 31 of the Euratom Treaty, the European Parliament has to be consulted before the Council of Ministers takes a final decision on these Directive proposals.

The discussions on the nuclear package in the European Parliament began and developed during the summer in the parliament’s Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy Committee (ITRE Committee) sessions of 9 July, 26 August, 9 September, 6 October and 3 November 2003.

More than 100 amendments were tabled by the committee.

The discussion on the amendments took place on 3 November 2003, and the vote in the ITRE committee took place on 27 November 2003. Overall, the vote reflected the position that the preferred solution was a watered down proposal which, at that time, had been put forward by the Italian Presidency of the European Council. All the amendments advocating a non-legally binding alternative to the Directives were rejected.

The vote in plenary took place on 13 January 2004.

Council of Ministers

The discussions on the nuclear package in the Council’s Atomic Questions Group (AQG) have resulted in a serious deadlock between the pro- and anti-Directive countries.

On 26 November 2003, the Committee of Permanent Representatives, COREPER, met to consider the compromise proposals drafted by the Italian Presidency of the European Council. The outcome of this meeting was not very conclusive, as the Council decided not to put the nuclear package issue to vote and to continue the negotiations under the Irish Presidency which was due to start on 1 January 2004.

back