24. 12. 84 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 343/3 
pational status and rights commensurate with the 
work performed. It would have to be made clear 
here which particular data should be recorded. 
This must of course be done within the framework 
of the provisions in the individual countries. Con­
sideration could, however, also be given to the set­
ting-up of an association for spouses sharing in the 
running of a business. 
2.7. Article 7(d) 
The Committee does not see any violation of the 
principle of equal treatment as between men and 
women where self-employed workers' organizations 
make the entitlement to vote and stand for office 
dependent on self-employed status, without regard 
to the sex of the person in question. The Committee 
does not therefore see any reason why it should not 
be left to these organizations to decide whether to 
Done at Brussels, 25 October 1984. 
1. Overall assessment 
1.1. The Committee: 
— noting that this Commission proposal is the 
third programme on the management and stor­
age of radioactive waste, 
— appreciating the great importance of nuclear 
energy in the Community's production of elec­
tricity, extend the right to vote to spouses sharing in the 
running of a business. 
Article 9 
The Committee would once again point out that the 
measures to implement the principle of equal treat­
ment should include sanctions in cases of discrimi­
nation, since otherwise practical enforcement of the 
present Directive will not be possible. 
Article 12 
The Committee notes the proposed deadline but 
would draw attention to the difficulties that could 
arise in some Member States in implementing the 
Directive. In this connection it would like compli­
ance with the Directive to be ensured in all coun­
tries as soon as possible. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Gerd MUHR 
— aware nonetheless of the necessity to continue 
to devote funding for research into alternative 
sources of energy, 
— recognizing that the essential prerequisite for 
the responsible use of nuclear energy is the safe 
management and definitive storage of radioac­
tive waste, Opinion on the proposal for a Council Decision adopting a programme on the 
management and storage of radioactive waste (1985 to 1989) (') 
(84/C 343/02) 
On 17 May 1984 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, 
under Article 7 of the Euratom Treaty, on the abovementioned proposal. 
The Section for Energy and Nuclear Questions, which was responsible for preparing 
the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 5 October 1984, in the 
light of the oral report by Mr Pearson. 
At its 220th plenary session (meeting of 25 October 1984) the Economic and Social 
Committee adopted the following opinion unanimously. 
(') OJ No C 166, 26.6. 1984. strongly supports the Commission's proposals. 
No C 343/4 Official Journal of the European Communities 24. 12. 84 
1.2. Arising, in part, from a visit by the study 
group to the Belgian Nuclear Research Centre at 
Mol, the Committee makes the following com­
ments: 
2. General remarks 
2.1. At the present time there is a growing public 
concern regarding the handling and storage of 
radioactive waste. This concern is understandable. 
Everything possible must be done to protect man 
and the environment. The Commisson's proposals 
are a continuation of its determination to resolve the 
problem of the management and of the definitive 
storage of radioactive waste, whatever its period of 
radioactivity, thus constituting the ultimate justifica­
tion for this action. 
2.2. The third five-year programme is justified 
since, whilst the precise assessment of the second 
programme cannot yet be made, the earlier pro­
grammes have achieved a considerable degree of 
success. There has been good and efficient coordi­
nation of international R&D into the storage of all 
types of radioactive waste. It is pointed out, how­
ever, that there are legal constraints in some Mem­
ber States which inhibit maximum effectiveness. 
2.3. The Committee believes that the proposal is 
further strengthened by the other R&D projects 
operating parallel to this proposal, notably in the 
field of radiation protection ('), the transport of 
radioactive materials within the European Com­
munity (2), the radioactive waste management 
research being carried out at the Joint Research 
Centre (ISPRA) (3), the safety of nuclear installa­
tions and transfrontier radiological problems (4), the 
decommissioning of nuclear installations (5). It is 
also understood that the implementing recommen­
dation of Article 37 of the Euratom Treaty has been 
recently modified. The introduction of the new 
CGC's (in this case the Advisory Committee on 
Management and Coordination for Nuclear Fission) 
should result in closer coordination between those 
concerned with the various problems associated 
with radioactive waste disposal. 
2.4. The Committee recognizes that this proposal is 
satisfactorily integrated with the 12-year plan of 
action in this field. It is pleased that Community 
(i) OJ No C 179,6. 7. 1983. 
(2) COM(84) 233 final. 
(3) OJ No C 250, 19. 9. 1983. 
(4) OJ No C 338, 15. 12. 1983. 
(5) OJN0C68, 9. 3. 1984. research is being carried out on a shared-cost basis 
as well as within the Joint Research Centre. 
3. Particular remarks 
The Committee: 
3.1. Approves the proposals in Part A of the 
Annex, building on the knowledge gained in the 
storage of all known types of radioactive waste. 
3.2. Recognizes that section B is a new stage 
toward the interim and definitive storage of high 
activity and long-life waste. As proposed in this sec­
tion (B) the construction of R & D laboratories in 
geological conditions, leading possibly to under­
ground industrial plants, could be far-reaching. 
3.3. Recognizes that the Mirage (Migration of 
Radio Nuclites in the Geosphere) project is highly 
technical and difficult but believes in the vital 
necessity of further research into the possible migra­
tion of radionucleides into the geosphere. An impor­
tant element is to establish facts, at present 
unknown, concerning the capacity of the various 
available geological structures to confine the 
radioactivity of stored waste. 
3.4. Agrees that the budget should be adequate for 
those projects being undertaken by the three Mem­
ber States but would point out that, should any 
other Member States become involved, then either 
extra Community funding will be required or the 
research cost must be borne by that Member State. 
3.5 Suggests that the public be made more aware 
of the subject as improved understanding can allay 
unnecessary fear. There is waste of varying degrees 
of radioactivity and of varied length of life. 
Radioactive emission can sometimes be confused 
with waste. These variances can have widely differ­
ing consequences. The differences between genetic 
and somatic effects, for example, are seldom 
explained. The necessary protection of those work­
ing in this industry will need to be adjusted in 
accordance with emerging knowledge and technol­
ogy. 
In the event of an accident occurring during the pro­
cessing and storage of radioactive waste, the facts of 
the case must be made immediately available to the 
appropriate authorities in each Member State to 
24. 12. 84 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 343/5 
enable all the prepared appropriate emergency mea­
sures to become operative. The side effects may not 
manifest themselves immediately. The physiological 
emergence of genetic effects will be delayed for a 
generation. 
4. Additional remarks 
The Committee would make the following com­
ments : 
4.1. It agrees that the management and disposal of 
radioactive waste concerns all the Member States 
even if one or more are not operating nuclear fission 
plants. clay and granite are suitable for wastes of differing 
radio-activity — they are complementary. Doubtless 
the Commission's proposal for the transportation of 
radioactive materials will cover the safety measures 
necessary for the removal of radioactive waste to the 
most appropriate definitive storage depots within 
the Community. The necessary harmonization of 
legal and economic instruments between Member 
States will need to be brought about. 
4.4. Whilst most Member States are active in the 
interim safe storage of waste, it is not wise to have a 
policy which involves waiting for at least 50 (per­
haps up to 100) years before the means of storage of 
high-level and long-life radioactive waste is decided 
upon. 
4.2. It believes that, notwithstanding the current 
understanding of the resolution of the problem in 
terms of physics, greater priority should be given to 
the separation of waste by remote handling tech­
niques, to enable the process of transmuting high-
active long-life waste into short-life elements to 
advance more rapidly. 
4.3. It believes that a more flexible approach by 
Member States toward the definitive stage of the 
storage of radioactive waste should be encouraged. 
Not all Member States have the geological structure 
available for the most effective final storage. Salt, 4.5. It is recognized that the problem of the defini­
tive storage of radioactive waste is relatively new. It 
may become necessary to solve new problems. 
Owing to the extreme longevity of certain radioac­
tive waste, the amount to be stored will continually 
increase. The Committee is therefore pleased that 
there is active cooperation between all those coun­
tries, within and outside the European Community, 
who are involved or concerned in nuclear fission. 
Complete international cooperation will be required 
to reinforce the protection of man and the environ­
ment from the potential effects of the storage of 
radioactive waste. 
Done at Brussels, 25 October 1984. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Gerd MUHR 
Opinion on the 13th report on competition policy of the Commission of the European 
Communities 
(84/C 343/03) 
On 11 April 1984 the Commission of the European Communities decided to consult 
the Economic and Social Committee on the abovementioned report. 
The Section for Industry, Commerce, Crafts and Services, which was responsible for 
preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 3 October 
1984, in the light of the report by Mr Bagliano. 
At its 220th plenary session (meeting of 25 October 1984), the Economic and Social 
Committee adopted the following opinion nem. con., with five abstentions.