29. 7. 85 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 188/11 
2. The following sources of information should be 
added to the list: 
— retailers and distributors, 
— bodies responsible for civil defence, 
— centres for sports medicine, 
— associations or organizations in the social sphere. 
2.4. Article 4 
This Article should be revised to make it clear that the 
information compiled pursuant to Article 1 should be 
used not only to carry out studies but also to encourage 
any other appropriate action. 
2.5. Articles 6 and 7 
The Committee is concerned that the confidentiality of 
the doctor/patient relationship is maintained, even 
though it recognizes that in exceptional cases public 
interest may require that certain information may be 
needed to treat other victims of a similar kind of acci­
dent, and/or to prevent future such occurrences. 
Done at Brussels, 29 May 1985. 
1. Preliminary Remarks 
Under Article 40 of the Euratom Treaty, the Commis­
sion is obliged to publish periodically 'illustrative 
programmes indicating in particular nuclear energy This information should in principle be given only with 
the agreement of the victim concerned; or if this is not 
possible only on an anonymous basis. 
2.6. Article 8 
The Committee notes that an annual report should be 
sent to it on the functioning of the system but asks that 
this report should: 
— include detailed statistical data with appropriate 
explanatory and interpretational comment, 
— cover, where applicable, follow-up action taken or 
proposed on product withdrawal, re-design or the 
establishment of standards (see paragraph 1.6 of the 
general comments). 
2.7. Article 9 
The Commission should exchange not only statistical 
information but, where appropriate, all relevant infor­
mation with non-Member States. 
production targets and all types of investment required 
for their attainment' (PINC). 
Since the last illustrative programme dated back to 
1972, the Commission decided in 1982 to publish a new The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Gerd MUHR 
Opinion on nuclear industries in the Community — illustrative nuclear programme under 
Article 40 of the Euratom Treaty — 1984 
(85/C 188/05) 
On 28 November 1984 the Commission of the European Communities, in accordance with 
Article 40 of the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom), 
asked the Economic and Social Committee for an opinion on the document entitled: 'The 
nuclear industries in the Community — Illustrative nuclear programme under Article 40 of 
the Euratom Treaty — 1984'. 
The Section for Energy and Nuclear Questions, which was responsible for preparing the 
Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 14 May 1985 in the light of the oral 
report by Mr Querleux. 
At its 227th plenary session (meeting of 30 May 1985), the Economic and Social Committee 
adopted the following opinion with no votes against and four abstentions: 
No C 188/12 Official Journal of the European Communities 29.7.85 
programme. The Committee notes that this document 
has been the subject of numerous discussions with the 
relevant circles in the Community. 
The Committee would observe that the Council of 
Ministers is not legally obliged to take a decision. The 
PINC is not in any way mandatory or interventionist 
and should be regarded as merely a frame of reference 
for the reflections and decisions of the Member States. 
2. The Committee's observations and suggestions 
2.1. Noting that the previous PINC dates back to 
1972, the Committee first of all welcomes the fact that 
the Commission has drawn up the present illustrative 
programme. However, it calls for the precise formula­
tion of an overall Community energy policy so that the 
programme will form an integral part of a comprehen­
sive Community strategy. 
In view of the importance of nuclear energy, the 
Committee thinks that in the future the Commission 
should abide strictly by its declared intention to issue 
more frequently (for example, every four years) an 
illustrative programme presenting an evaluation of the 
results obtained in the period that has elapsed and any 
progressive technical and economic adaptations of the 
major strategic guidelines that are essential in this 
area. 
In particular, the specific communications made — 
quite logically — by the Commission on every aspect of 
nuclear energy in the interval between two PINCs 
should be recapitulated and commented on in each new 
illustrative programme published, which is essential if 
this periodical document is to retain its exhaustive 
nature. 
2.2. Whatever the 'illustrative' nature of the Commis­
sions nuclear plan in legal terms, the Committee would 
stress that this plan is not without practical implica­
tions: in pursuance of Article 41 of the Euratom Treaty 
major nuclear investments have to be communicated to 
the Commission, which has to give its views to the 
Member State concerned. The PINC sets out the 'rules 
of the game', forming essential criteria for the formula­
tion of the Commission's views. 
Any nuclear investor whose projects diverged substan­
tially from these 'rules of the game' (or failed to take 
account of public opinion) would undoubtedly be 
liable to experience serious difficulties in obtaining the 
loans needed in order to finance a particular project. 
2.3. It is stated in the PINC that, taking into account 
the investments that have been practically decided on 
to date, some 35% of the electricity generated in the 
Community will be of nuclear origin by 1990 and that, 
according to forecasts of subsequent investments already under consideration in various Member States, 
this figure should rise to 40% by 1995. The PINC also 
indicates that nuclear energy's share of electricity 
production in the early years of the 21st century should 
be close to 50%. 
The Committee considers these lines of approach to be 
logical in view of: 
— the economic competitiveness of electricity of 
nuclear origin, 
— the reliability and safety of the installations, 
— the macro-economic impact of nuclear energy, the 
cost of which basically corresponds to the value 
added by European industry (the raw material, 
uranium, accounts for less than 10% of the cost of 
the kWh); there is a knock-on effect on major 
industrial sectors in the countries concerned 
(nuclear engineering, civil engineering, mechanical 
engineering, electrical engineering and the 
chemical, electronic and information technology 
sectors, etc. ...), 
— the favourable effect on the overall balance of trade 
of the EEC countries (little expenditure of foreign 
exchange to purchase raw material and promotion 
of an export role for European industry in the 
various spheres connected with nuclear energy). 
The Committee would, however, point out that, given 
the uncertainties of long-term forecasting (due in 
particular to the crisis), periodic revaluations of very 
expensive projects are called for as part of a cautious 
strategy. From this point of view, the four-yearly 
updating advocated by the Committee in 2.1 above, will 
play an essential role. 
2.4. The Committee approves the PINCs message 
that in the long term the Community has a basic 
interest in reducing as much as possible its dependence 
on imports of uranium (the known reserves of which 
that can be exploited at a reasonable cost correspond to 
about 20 years' supplies) and in pursuing a supply 
strategy based inter alia on: 
— continued prospecting by the Member States and by 
economic operators both on their own territory and 
outside the Community's, 
— a storage policy, 
— a policy for the reprocessing and temporary storage 
of used fissile material. 
The Committee is also in agreement on the following 
two points: 
— reactors of the present generation will be progres­
sively improved and will continue to be constructed 
for several decades to come, 
— thought should be given already to the longer term, 
and preparations made for the achievement of eco­
nomic competitiveness by the next generation of 
fast breeder reactors (FBRs) in accordance with the 
programme set out in the PINC; this should be 
done by checking at each stage the technical and 
economic reliability of the reactors. 
29. 7. 85 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 188/13 
2.5. The Committee would also confirm that it is in 
favour of the continuation — without any slackening of 
effort — of Community research on thermonuclear 
fusion, a potential major source of energy that could be 
inexhaustible (JET programme), within the framework 
of the possibilities offered by a research budget that is 
apportioned in a balanced manner, with a timetable for 
the objectives. 
It thinks that this very important prospect merits more 
than a simple brief mention at the end of the Annex to 
the PINC. 
2.6. The Committee would like even greater stress to 
be laid, in the definitive text of the PINC, on the 
importance of and the need for genuine political and 
industrial cooperation between the Member States on 
nuclear energy. 
The Committee takes pleasure in pointing out that the 
first FBR now approaching completion is the work of 
an international company, Nersa, embracing electricity 
generating undertakings in France, Italy, Germany, the 
Netherlands, Belgium and the United Kingdom, and 
that similar financial arrangements have been made for 
a new project, SNR 2. The Committee would strongly 
recommend this method of pooled investment and 
major R&D efforts by electricity generators, which it 
considers to be particularly suitable for resolving 
fundamental problems such as: 
— the entry of the 'small countries' into the field of 
nuclear energy on an equal level and the allocation 
to their national undertakings of a fair share of 
nuclear energy production and the associated indus­
trial benefits, 
— the construction (by a sufficiently early date to 
enable it to be operational in time) of the essential 
plant for the reprocessing of irradiated fuel 
elements from FBRs; 
— the industrial — and hence economic — rationaliza­
tion at EEC level of FBRs of the second genera­
tion. 
2.7. The Committee considers that the PINC does not 
lay sufficient emphasis on the problems that still arise 
(with wide variations from one country to another and 
even from one region to another within the same 
country) in connection with the acceptance of nuclear 
energy by public opinion; the Committee fears that if 
certain situations do not improve from this point of 
view, the industrial plant connected with nuclear 
energy will be concentrated in a small number of coun­
tries. 
While not denying that efforts at information have been 
made in the past, the Committee would, accordingly, 
recommend that all data concerning nuclear energy be 
presented to the public through a campaign of regular 
and repeated messages in the mass media (written and 
audio-visual). 2.8. This campaign should present the various points 
of view, and deal with the various aspects of the 
nuclear process in a methodical manner: preparation of 
fuels, the actual reaction, reprocessing, storage of 
waste. It should make everything concerning the 
nuclear industry clear arid comprehensible to the popu­
lation. It should highlight the advantages of this 
industry: 
— replacement for traditional non-renewable energy 
sources, 
— competitiveness and macro-economic impact, 
— greater energy independence, 
— high degree of safety of installations, 
— non-polluting, 
— international rules for the prevention of irregular 
proliferation. 
But it should also give an objective analysis of the 
problems connected with the nuclear industry, such 
as: 
— the limits to the use of electricity, 
— the effects of largeness of scale and specialization, 
— the technological complicity, which calls for 
constant vigilance in order to curb all proliferation 
risks and all radiation risks. 
It should also deal clearly and frankly with questions 
the public is insufficiently familiar with, particularly 
the reprocessing or the non-reprocessing of irradiated 
fuel elements and the sorage (provisional and final) of 
radioactive waste. 
The Commission can and must act as a driving force 
here, but it cannot do this all on its own: manufacturers 
and decision-makers at regional and local level and 
employers' and workers' organizations have a no less 
vital role to play in providing information; this should 
include full, automatic disclosure of even the slightest 
run-of-the-mill operating incident, since rumour might 
distort this into a deliberately concealed accident. 
This clear and detailed information is really of funda­
mental importance; the campaign should be directed in 
particular at all socio-economic organizations, local 
authority decision-makers and associations for the 
protection of the environment and should also of 
course cover workers in the nuclear industry. 
2.9. It is not contested that the Commission has paid 
careful attention to the following important matters: 
— the safety of nuclear installations and the protection 
of health, 
— the existence of guarantees concerning the use of 
nuclear materials, 
— the particular issue of the safety of the transport of 
nuclear fuels, 
But the Committee regrets that the PINC (which claims 
to be an exhaustive document providing guidelines) 
No C 188/14 Official Journal of the European Communities 29. 7. 85 
fails to give, in a detailed chapter, an overall survey of 
existing rules and points for future consideration in 
these areas. The publication of a new edition of the 
PINC provides an excellent opportunity to highlight 
how in the area of nuclear safety the development of 
technology goes hand in hand with studies on the 
problems of safety and security as well as to propose 
improvements in this area on the basis of the ex­
perience of all concerned. 
The Committee would particularly urge that, after all 
the parties concerned, particularly the authorities, have 
been fully informed, and an impact analysis covering 
the entire cycle has been carried out, the transport 
operations performed by specialist carriers should not 
be impeded by red tape, regardless of whether these 
operations are cross-frontier or within a given 
country. 
The aim should be a homogeneous approach to the 
problem of nuclear and dangerous chemical transport 
operations and installations, particularly where there 
are cross-frontier aspects. 
2.10. The Committee considers that the PINC's 
presentation of the problem of storage of waste, 
although satisfactory from the point of view of current 
scientific data, would be clearer and more convincing if 
there were an indicative timetable for concrete action 
Done at Brussels, 30 May 1985. concerning the final storage of high-activity waste in 
deep geological formations. The Commission should 
take steps to bring about real cooperation between the 
Member States regarding the selection of sites. A large-
scale campaign to inform the population concerned is 
particularly called for. 
3. Conclusions 
The illustrative programme proposed by the Commis­
sion is on the whole a well-structured and positive 
document, even though a number of improvements 
could be made in order to: 
— highlight the major importance of greater Commu­
nity political will in the implementation of 
programmes concerning the various aspects of 
nuclear energy; 
— specify more clearly the action to be effectively 
embarked upon by the end of the century in the 
crucial areas of the reprocessing and interim storage 
of irradiated fuel elements and the management of 
radioactive waste; this should be done with the aid 
of an initial set of indicative deadlines to be 
updated in subsequent editions of the PINC by 
means of rolling plans. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Gerd MUHR