23.1.75 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 16/1 
II 
(Preparatory Acts) 
ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE 
Opinion on the proposal for revision of the multiannual research programme 
The text referred to the Committee has not been published in the Official Journal of the 
European Communities. 
A. LEGAL BASIS FOR THE OPINION 
On 9 May 1974, the Council referred the abovementioned proposal to the Economic 
and Social Committee under Article 170 of the Treaty establishing the European Atomic 
Energy Community. 
B. OPINION OF THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE 
The Economic and Social Committee drew up its Opinion at its 125th plenary session, 
held in Brussels on 28 November 1974. 
The Opinion is published below: 
THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE, 
Having regard to the referral on 10 May 1974 by the 
Council of the European Communities of the 
proposal for a revision of the multiannual research 
programme; 
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the 
European Atomic Energy Community, and in 
particular the second sentence of the first paragraph 
of Article 170 thereof; 
Having regard to the decision taken by its Bureau on 
28 May 1974, instructing the Section for Energy and 
Nuclear Questions to draw up an Opinion and a 
report on the matter; 
Having regard to the decision taken by its Bureau on 
9 October 1974, instructing the Section for Energy 
and Nuclear Questions to continue with its work on 
the matter; Having regard to the Opinion adopted unanimously 
by the Section for Energy and Nuclear Questions at 
its meeting on 29 October 1974; 
Having regard to the report submitted by the 
Rapporteur, Mr Schlitt, at the meeting held by the 
Section for Energy and Nuclear Questions on 
29 October 1974; 
Having regard to the discussions at its 125th plenary 
session of 28 November 1974; 
Whereas it is necessary to develop new sources and 
forms of energy in the framework of a common 
energy policy; 
Whereas the Joint Research Centre can play an 
important role in this connection through its 
multiannual research programme; 
Whereas it is intended to deal with the more general 
problems of energy, research and development in a 
future Opinion on the communication from the 
Commission entitled 'Energy for Europe: research 
and development', 
No C 16/2 Official Journal of the European Communities 23.1. 75 
HAS ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING OPINION 
by a unanimous vote: 
1. General comments 
1.1. After detailed discussion, the Economic and 
Social Committee came to the conclusion that the 
review of the multiannual research programme 
should be looked at from the following angles: 
(a) changes in the programmes' objectives; 
(b) changes in organization; 
(c) changes in staff structure; 
(d) changes in the provision of adequate financial 
resources. 
1.2. As regards the nuclear programmes, the 
Committee feels that there was no justification for 
the progressive cut-backs in the funds made available 
at the inception of the European Atomic Energy 
Community for the research and training 
programmes. In the Committee's estimation, the 
further development of nuclear energy has 
confronted the Community with so many 
far-reaching tasks and problems that it would have 
been advisable to take research to an increasing 
extent out of the national sphere and put it on a 
Community basis, thus allowing optimum 
rationalization. The Community's multiannual 
nuclear programme is a rather modest one measured 
against the tasks and the considerable nuclear R&D 
expenditure at national level. 
1.3. The Committee further believes that the 
present research programmes which are to be revised 
are to be viewed to some extent in conjunction with 
the Community's energy problems. The Committee is 
aware that the Commission is carrying out studies on 
a comprehensive energy research programme. The 
Committee therefore wonders why the Commission's 
proposed amendments to the current programmes 
have not already been adapted to take account of the 
research work resulting from the energy situation. 
The Committee has also noted that the research 
programme entitled 'Energy for Europe: research and 
development', prepared by the Commission, is an 
outline programme intended to stimulate priority 
action in the energy sector. Accordingly, the 
Committee believes that current work, in so far as it 
concerns energy matters, must be integrated in the 
energy research programme when the latter is drawn 
up. In this context the Committee would refer to the major efforts which the USA is prepared to make in 
the field of energy research. The Committee notes 
that the Member States are already devoting 
considerable public funds to national energy research 
programmes. In view of the exceptionally high 
expenditure necessary in this sector, the Committee 
feels that it is absolutely vital to achieve extremely 
close cooperation and coordination in respect of all 
work, whether already begun or still at the planning 
stage. A common energy policy must also be reflected 
in a suitable energy research programme — in other 
words, the driving force of a Community energy 
policy must be coupled with an appropriate 
Community research policy. 
1.4. The Committee is of the opinion that the 
main emphasis will still have to be placed on nuclear 
energy in an integrated energy research programme in 
which current Euratom research projects are 
continued, one major reason being that as things 
stand at present nuclear energy is a real alternative to 
oil. The Committee also considers that research on 
energy conservation should be accorded an important 
position in the projected energy research programme. 
1.5. The Committee realizes that the outline 
programme prepared by the Commission is to be 
regarded primarily as a first step on the road to a 
common energy research programme. The 
Committee feels, however, that some work in the 
field of energy conservation could have been included 
already in the revised version of the multiannual 
research programme. 
2. Specific comments 
2.1. In view of the major efforts to expand 
nuclear-generating capacity in the Community, it 
seems necessary to intensify Community-level 
research in the particularly critical areas of nuclear 
energy. The reactor safety section of the programme 
is undoubtedly one such area. The Committee 
welcomes the proposal that staff and financial 
lesources should be increased so that additional 
theoretical work can be carried out. However, the 
Committee is unable to say whether the funds 
allocated are adequate or are being used rationally. 
Here the Commission text could have benefited from 
the inclusion of a note explaining to what extent and 
with what financial resources the Member States 
carry out their own research and development in the 
field of reactor safety. Furthermore, the Committee 
does not consider that it would be enough to 
integrate and coordinate work solely through the 
Advisory Committee on Programme Management. 
The integration of work could be furthered if the 
23.1.75 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 16/3 
services of additional qualified experts from Member 
States were secured in some suitable way. This could 
also help to transfer the work done in this field to 
Community level. wonders whether it is advisable to run these courses 
as long as no definite ideas have been formed as to 
curricula. In addition, it should be checked whether 
there is any interest among Community undertakings 
and authorities in a joint training centre at Ispra for 
health physics and nuclear materials safeguards. 
2.2. With regard to that part of the programme 
dealing with hydrogen production, the Committee 
shares the view of the Commission that certain 
technical and scientific investigations for the 
evaluation of planned processes should be entrusted 
to firms active in these fields — at least in so far as 
the JRC does not have appropriate research facilities 
and scientific and technical staff. At all events the 
views of the Advisory Committee on Programme 
Management should be considered before work is 
commissioned. Basically, however, the Committee 
would draw attention to the importance of this 
programme, especially in respect of future energy 
supplies. Investigations in this field are being 
conducted at present in many industrial states and 
special care should, therefore, be taken to avoid 
duplication of work. 
2.3. As regards the fusion reactors programme, the 
Committee would refer to the existing five-year 
programme for indirect action on fusion reactors. Its 
approval of the present proposal for direct action is 
conditional on care being taken to ensure 
compatibility with the five-year programme. The new 
programme should if possible be incorporated in the 
five-year programme in due course. Consideration 
should, however, be given to the fundamental 
question of whether the JRC should continue to 
undertake direct activities in this area, given the 
existence of major national research establishments 
and research programmes. The Committee wonders 
whether it is logical to build up an infrastructure for 
direct JRC research. 
2.4. As far as the programme on the 
remote-sensing of earth resources is concerned, the 
Committee stresses the desirability of such 
investigations, which are of potential importance to 
the Community. At present the programme is not 
designed to be long term, but should the initial work 
be concluded successfully, consideration ought to be 
given to continuing it on a broad basis. 
2.5. As regards the expenditure on summer schools 
as set out under the heading 'training, the Committee 2.6. Provided the level of employment at Ispra is 
safeguarded by development of other activities, the 
Committee has no objections to the Ispra 1 reactor 
being closed down and relevant activities being 
transferred to one of the universities (Pisa or Pavia) 
prepared to take them over. 
2.7. The Committee deplores the cut-back of the 
waste disposal programme and, in particular, the 
eight man-years' decrease, in view of the serious 
implications of the waste problem for the safety of 
the general public and future generations. The 
Committee considers the proposed changes to be 
justified but would have preferred new projects to 
have been introduced in the programme to replace 
those being discontinued. The processing and storage 
of radioactive waste is one of the areas of nuclear 
technology where considerable R&D work still 
needs to be done. To take a particularly important 
instance, there is no Community concept for the 
disposal of medium- and high-activity waste. Indeed, 
in view of the fact that this field is of special public 
interest, closer collaboration between the Member 
States would have been appropriate here, together 
with a cooperation programme with the USA and 
international cooperation intended to yield solutions 
to this fundamental problem which satisfy 
international public opinion. 
2.8. As regards the activities of the Petten research 
establishment, the Section points out first of all that 
of the total of four JRC establishments Petten is the 
only one not to have a joint programme. Operation 
of the HFR (expenditure commitment, 23 million 
units of account and 95 staff) is financed by only 
three Member States. This unsatisfactory state of 
affairs for a JRC research establishment originally led 
the Commission, when it first submitted this 
multiannual programme, to propose that Petten be 
closed down. The continued operation of the HFR 
was assured only by a decision on the complementary 
programme. The decline in activities at Petten, which 
was nevertheless inevitable, was to be offset by new 
activities at the Council's request. The Commission 
undertook to present appropriate proposals. In 
revising the multiannual programme, the Commission 
No C 16/4 Official Journal of the European Communities 23.1.75 
has now suggested two new areas of activity for 
Petten, namely: 
(a) technical and scientific activities in support of the 
Commission's departments, the main emphasis 
being on the administration of the customs 
union; 
(b) investigation of raw materials derived from coal. 
By means of the two programmes, staff could be 
maintained at 167 persons, 72 of this number being 
assigned to the abovementioned new activities. 
2.9. The Committee recognizes that the 
Commission must have scientific and technical 
facilities at its disposal for the administration of the 
Common Customs Tariff in order to be able to carry 
out the tasks entrusted to it under Council 
Regulation (EEC) No 97/69. The Commission could, 
it is true, fall back on appropriate Member State 
facilities, especially national customs laboratories, but 
the Committee considers that the Commission cannot 
in all cases rely on the public (and perhaps private 
enterprise) technical and scientific facilities of the 
Member States. For certain tasks the Commission 
must have facilities of its own. In view of the limited 
means envisaged and the limited staff, the 
Commission will anyway not be able to dispense 
with collaboration with the Member States and 
Member State establishments. Greater freedom of 
action in this area would also help to strengthen the 
Commission's position. 
2.10. As regards the second proposed activity for 
Petten (investigation of raw materials derived from 
coal), the Committee would prefer not to go into the 
legal question of whether this programme could be 
carried out on the basis of the ECSC Treaty. It is 
inclined, however, to the Commission's view that the 
matters to be dealt with are not typical problems of 
the coal industry, but problems of carbon chemistry. 
In principle, the Committee welcomes the 
Commission's taking up these questions. It cannot be 
unmindful, however, of how the proposed work 
stands in relation to parallel work in the Member 
States. Execution of such work in the JRC is only 
justifiable if it is planned on a more long-term basis 
and if it can make a considerable contribution to 
research work in the Member States. Only if the 
work were to be carried out over a fairly long period 
with sufficient funds made available and it were 
possible to take on further qualified personnel, could 
the Committee approve this programme. It suggests 
that the Commission sound out expert opinion in scientific and industrial circles in the Member States 
before a final decision is taken on this programme. At 
all events close coordination of work at national level 
should be guaranteed in this sector too. 
2.11. As regards the revision of the EEC research 
programme on the protection of the environment 
(indirect action), the Committee endorses the 
Commission's suggestion that the number of staff be 
increased from the four .originally proposed to eight. 
The Committee is convinced that a staff of four 
would be inadequate to administer and supervise the 
estimated 60 to 80 research projects in the most 
varied scientific fields. 
2.12. In the context of the discussion of action on 
protection of the environment, the Committee 
wondered how environmental protection and energy 
production can be reconciled and what impact this 
now universal requirement of compatibility will have 
on the research programme. Even if no specific 
examination is made of this problem in the current 
research programmes, the Committee believes that it 
must be given consideration in the future energy 
research programme. 
2.13. As far as the organization of the JRC is 
concerned, the Committee notes that in spite of the 
fact that the multiannual programme was adopted in 
1972, the problems facing the centre have not been 
resolved. First of all, the relative autonomy achieved 
in 1971, coupled with a more flexible framework for 
governmental discussions on the formulation of 
programmes, has not had the described effect, i.e. has 
not led to a renewed firm resolve to entrust the JRC 
with scientific projects of prime importance to the 
Community. Instead, a programme with minimum 
provision for actual research has been adopted. This 
programme has in its broad outlines been jeopardized 
from the outset by endless budgetary discussions — 
thus delaying implementation — and by the decision 
to revise it one year, to all intents and purposes, after 
its adoption. Secondly, owing to the conspicuous 
absence of a political will, none of the staff problems 
relating to. the revitalization of the JRC has in effect 
been solved. And so it has been against this 
unfavourable background that the question of 
discrimination in salaries between staff carrying out 
the same tasks but having different legal status has 
taken on major importance and posed a threat to the 
smooth running of the establishments. Moreover, 
there has been no staff mobility or retraining and no 
influx of young scientists because there has been no 
planning to meet requirements — it has been 
23.1. 75 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 16/5 
impossible to ascertain what these are in view of the 
uncertainty about the JRC's real function. No 
administrative device not even the framework for 
future recruitment, will fully answer the only 
question that really matters as far as the JRC is 
concerned: is it or is it not the role of the Centre to 
undertake Community research as circumstances 
require? As long as the Centre is regarded as a more 
or less superfluous adjunct to national research 
organizations, which is gradually to be deprived of 
the few responsibilities it still retains, it is useless to 
look for solutions in the staff regulations of its 
present or future personnel — that is unless the 
situation deteriorates to the point where measures by 
the staff aimed at giving the JRC independent 
research objectives in the interests of the .Community 
are justified. 
2.14. In its proposal for the revision of a 
multiannual research programme of the European 
Atomic Energy Community, the Commission calls for 
a higher financial ceiling for the implementation of 
the programme. The Commission had originally 
proposed a reserve fund of 21 million units of 
account in addition to the maximum amounts 
authorized. When the four-year programmes had 
been running for only one year it emerged that the 
funds allocated were inadequate to cover, in 
particular, staff expenditure which had undergone a 
disproportionately large increase. Expenditure on 
materials, for which a 5 % increase had been allowed 
in the appropriations, had also risen more sharply 
than expected. Consequently the JRC had to call on 
funds due for release at later stages of the programme in order to implement the programme as planned. 
During discussion of the financial shortfall to date, 
bearing in mind the probable future trend in staff and 
material costs, it became clear that the reserve fund 
of 21 million units of account proposed by the 
Commission was totally inadequate to cover the 
present and any future deficits. 
2.15. The Committee's views were subsequently 
borne out when preparatory work on the 1975 
budget also revealed that the reserve fund proposed 
by the Commission would not cover expenditure up 
to the conclusion of the four-year programme in 
1976. Among other factors, the effects on the various 
items in the budget of cost increases — some of 
which have been brought about by inflation — have 
contributed to the deficit which promises to continue 
to rise. Therefore the Commission now proposes 
increasing maximum expenditure by 41-238 million 
units of account. 
2.16. The Committee considers the raising of the 
financial ceiling and the amount of the increase 
proposed by the Commission to be justified. 
Done at Brussels, 28 November 1974. ' 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Henri CANONGE 
ANNEX 
to the Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee 
The following passage from the Section Opinion was replaced by an amendment which was 
adopted during the discussions by 45 votes to 33 with 19 abstentions: 
2.13. As far as the organization of the JRC is concerned, the Section notes that it has not 
been possible to solve the difficult staff problems in the intervening period since the beginning 
of the current multiannual programme. It deplores the fact that, in the course of revising the 
programme, no further thought has been given to how the situation could be improved. The 
Section is afraid that the present arrangement, and particularly the fact that the Staff Regu­
lations of officials apply to the majority of the staff, will lead to increasing immobility of the 
entire body of personnel. The Section knows full well from similar problems at many Member 
State establishments how difficult it is to recruit a large proportion of scientific staff on fixed-
term contracts, so as to obtain a constant flow of new suggestions and ideas from younger 
No C 16/6 Official Journal of the European Communities 23.1. 75 
employees. If the Member States want to maintain the JRC as an active and creative research 
establishment in the longer term, highly qualified young scientists must be offered sufficient 
incentive to work there on fixed-term contracts. The appeal of working for the JRC must also 
be enhanced by assigning it ambitious projects and thus, at the same time, guaranteeing it 
higher status in the scientific world. The Section considers that insufficient effort is being made 
along these lines and that the Member States are unwilling to transfer major scientific work 
and projects from the national to the Community level. Without at least one top-ranking 
scientific project, the JRC will always be overshadowed by national establishments and continue 
to be engaged on more or less supplementary work. 
Opinion on the proposal for a Council Directive on the approximation of the laws of 
the Member States relating to the sulphur content of certain liquid fuels 
The text referred to the Committee was published in Official Journal of the European 
Communities No C 35 of 28 March 1974, pages 75 to 77. 
A. LEGAL BASIS FOR THE OPINION 
On 26 February 1974, the Council referred the abovementioned proposal to the 
Economic and Social Committee under Article 100 of the Treaty establishing the 
European Economic Community. 
B. OPINION OF THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE 
The Economic and Social Committee drew up its Opinion at its 125th plenary session, 
held in Brussels on 28 November 1974. 
The Opinion is published below: 
THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE, 
Having regard to the referral on 26 February 1974 by 
the Council of the European Communities of the 
proposal for a Council Directive on the 
approximation of the laws of the Member States 
relating to the sulphur content of certain liquid fuels; 
Having regard to Article 100 of the Treaty 
establishing the European Economic Community; 
Having regard to the decision taken by its Bureau on 
26 February 1974, instructing the Section for 
Industry, Commerce, Crafts and Services to draw up 
an Opinion and a report on the matter; 
Having regard to the Opinion adopted by the Section 
for Industry, Commerce, Crafts and Services at its 
meeting on 3 July 1974, 
Having regard to the supplementary Opinion 
adopted by the Section for Protection of the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Affairs 
on 18 June 1974; 
Having regard to the report submitted by the 
Rapporteur, Mr De Bievre; 
Having regard to the discussions at its 125th plenary 
session of 28 November 1974, 
HAS ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING OPINION 
by 63 votes to 18: 
The Economic and Social Committee approves the 
proposal, subject to the following comments: