COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
COM (89) 347 final 
Brussels, 7 February 1990 
NOCLBAR 1KIJUSIKIKS IN TBB OGMMDNTZY 
*** 
THE NOGUiAR POWER STATION DESK» AND OCHSTHDCTION INDDSTRY 
AND OOfflOTGN OF TBS EDTCPEAN SINGLE MABKET 
(Update of the Illustrative Nuclear Program» 
for the Conmunity - PINC, adopted by the Ocwml selon In 1964 
under Article 40 of the Euratom Treaty 
and published In 1966 together with the opinion of the ESC) 
NOTICE 
The Commission adopted on 26 July 1989 a document on the "Nuclear 
Industries In the Community Update of the Illustrative Nuclear 
Programme under Article 40 of the Euratom Treaty^)". In accordance 
with this Article, the document has been submitted to the Economic and 
Social Committee for their opinion, and was adopted by that Committee 
in Its plenary session of 19 December 1989. 
This present document reproduces the text adopted by the Commission In 
1989 accompanied by the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee. 
(1) Doc. C0M(89)347 
- 2 -
CONTENTS 
PREFACE Page 3 
SOMMAPY Page 4 
A. INTHÛDDCTICN (Paras 1 to 4) 
B. INVESTMENTS IN NUCLEAR POWER 
Operating efficiency of nuclear power stations (8) 
Fixed constraints in the nuclear power industry (9) 
Optimization of electricity production (10 and 11) 
Competition on the world produotion-eeruippent 
market (12) 
C. THE EQUIPMENT, COMPONENT AND SERVICES MARKET 
Completion of the internal energy market and 
the nuclear power Industry (13 and 14) 
The background to the development of 
European standardization (18) 
The specific features of nuclear power (16) 
Standardization in the nuclear power Industry (17 and 18) 
Standardization and nuclear safety (19 and 20) 
Competition and Industrial structure (21 and 22) 
Current developments (23) 
Analysis of the nuclear-power market (24) 
D. AN EXAMPLE OF COOPERATION: THE CASE OF THE FAST BREEDER 
The value of the fast reactor to Europe (28) 
The competitiveness of the fast reactor (26) 
The Industrial aspects of the fast reactor: 
the EFR project (27 and 28) 
Follow-up action and the responsibility of the 
public authorities (29) 
E. OCNCL0SI0NS (30 and 31) 
- 3 -
22SEACE 
On 22 November 1984 the Oomnd-SBlon adopted a document entitled "Nuclear 
Industries in the Community; Illustrative Nuclear Programme under 
Article 40 of the Euratom Treaty", hereinafter called PT2C. 
Pursuant to Article 40, the document was submitted to the wnr»n<Tnio and 
Social Committee for its opinion, which was delivered at that Committee's 
session of 30 May 1988. 
The Commission formally published the document, together with the opinion 
of the Committee, on 23 July 1965 (Doc. CCN(88)401 final). 
The 1984 PINC set out the Commission's guidelines with regard to the 
nuclear-power production objectives In the Community; it also ****** r** the 
implications of attaining these objectives for all parties oonoerned with 
the nuclear sector: jxibllo authorities, electricity producers and wnriiay 
industries. 
All the interrelated aspects of nuclear power are covered by the overall 
energy policy and the 1964 PINC was one of the elements taken into account 
when the Council established the energy objectives for 1996 in 
September 1986. 
The guidelines presented by the Commission In the 1964 PINC are, In the 
main, still valid today. However, it la advisable to enmmlns the Impact 
which the advent of the Internal market will have on the nuclear Industry. 
For this reason, the Commission announoert in its Programme for 1969 that it 
would update the Illustrative Nuclear Programme to take account of the 
prospects after completion of the single European market.1 
*** 
This document fulfils that commitment and deliberately deals exclusively 
with matters relating to the nuclear power-station design and construction 
industry. The Commission will publish it formally after receiving the 
opinion of the Eoonomio and Social Committee. 
The publication of the next PINC, which will comprehensively update the 
objectives and reoommendations for nuclear power production in the 
Community, under Article 40 of the Euratom Treaty* is scheduled for 1992. 
1 See para. 222. 
- 4 -
When adopting its working document on the completion of "The Internal 
Energy Market" (0CM(88)238 of 2 May 1988), the Commission was anxious to 
Include the nuclear power-station construction sector in the scope of that 
document, while acknowledging the specific features of Hie sector. 
It is now essflntlal that the priority action identified in that document be 
Initiated if the whole exercise of completing the internal energy market is 
not to be put at risk. The aim of the action in question is to create a 
genuine common market for equipment and components and ensure its 
transparency, thereby reducing the investment costs and Improving the 
competitiveness of the Industries in this sector. 
The current indications are that there will be very few annual orders for 
nuclear power stations, at least until the resumption of activity which 
could result from the need to replace the existing installations in 15 to 
20 years time. The equipment market (complete power stations or NSSS)2 
and the oomponent market (vessels, steam generators, turbines, alternators, 
pumps, eto. ; will hence be very modest in numerical terms, although it will 
continue to be appreciable from the standpoint of turnover. 
The mini ear market is, moreover, characterized by certain specific 
features: the decisive importance of national safety authorities, the need 
for long-term continuity and hence to safeguard teohnioal skills, the 
volume of service and maintenance activities and the small number of 
undertakings competent in this sector. 
All things considered, the quite spécifie nature of nuclear power markets 
does not preclude the implementation of a policy for opening up the market, 
but it does mean that some adjustment of that policy will be necessary. 
This will require action and a special procedure where standardization is 
concerned. Standardization is necessary in order to deoompartnentalize 
the market and should, moreover, provide a result compatible with safety 
requirements. Tbe link between these two aspects should be considered by 
the Commission in a very special way. Since safety is an aspect of 
primary Importance in the preparation of teohnioal standards, the state of 
progress of the work on standardization should be oommunioated to the 
"safety" groups of experts in order to prevent Inconsistences and 
incompatibility between the standards and the safety levels required 
throughout the nuclear production cycle. This prooedure oould not, 
however, be substituted for the formal agreement of the national safety 
authorities, but it would Increase the likelihood of that agreement's being 
obtained at the appropriate time. 
NSSS: Nuclear Steam Supply System (nuclear part of the power 
station). 
- 5 -
In addition, the Commission will set up a group of experts which will be 
responsible for helping it to assess the technical aspects of the nuclear 
power market from the standpoint of the internal market. That group, 
chaired by a Ccnnilssion representative and made up of representatives of 
the Investors concerned, mainly electricity producers, will periodically 
rapox-t to the Commission on its observations and Inform it of ways and 
iseans of ensuring a "coordinated development of investments" within the 
asaning of Article 40 of the Euratom Treaty. 
In tha longer term, fast breeder reactor (FHR) technology, once it has 
reached, full mturity, is likely to open up major new opportunities as 
regards energy supply by making optimum use of the stock of depleted 
uranium in the Cosntunity. At all events, combined operation of the FER 
and other currant reactor types could stabilize the uranium market for a 
very long time. 
In the Community, development efforts are now focused on the EFR (European 
Fast Reactor Project) ; the various design, research and development 
activities conducted by industry, eleotrioity producers and research 
organizations as a contribution to the project are being closely 
coordinated. These are acoompanied by rationalization which will result, 
on the one hand, in substantial savings of resources and the setting-up of 
an integrated industrial structure and, on the other hand, in the 
.definition of a single - and in consequence exemplary - set of standards 
v'iiich, at the appropriate time, will facilitate the operation of the 
internal market. 
The SFR project will be fully evaluated in the middle of the next deoerte 
from the standpoint of both eoonomio and safety aspects. This evaluation 
will make it possible to assess the potential of the concept on the basis 
of a project Involving a reactor designed for csanstauotion by a European 
Indus-trial group in all the Member States concerned in which it can obtain 
a construction permit. 
In view of the importance of this evaluation for determining future nuclear 
investments, it is desirable for the Commission to be associated with it; 
indeed, under Article 40 of the Euratom Treaty, the Commission has a 
spécifie responsibility In this area. 
In the meantime, work on the development and mastery of the technology 
Phpm'M be continued, particularly with a view to promoting safety at every 
stage of the nuclear production cycle and lowering investment and operating 
costs, in order to render the oonoept economically competitive when the 
electricity-generating installations are being replaced in 15 to 20 years 
time. Such matters cannot be entrusted solely to future investors, since 
responsibility in respect of the long-term energy supply policy must be 
assumed primarily by the public authorities. 
- 6 -
A. lOTU'lll.'I'UM 
1. Since the adoption of the Single European Act in December 1966, 
completion of the internal market has been the Community's main 
priority. In the energy sector, the starting point of the Community 
action is represented £? a Commission working document entitled "The 
Internai Energy Market" (O0tf(88)236 final of 2 May 1966), which lists 
the obstacles to completion of that market together with the basic 
areas to be studied as a matter of priority. 
2. As regards nuclear energy, it is pointed out that the priority area is 
the equipment and component market. This subject by* already been 
raised in PINC as an ob Jeotive of the Community strategy for the 
development of nuclear energy (para. 72), an essential basis of that 
strategy being the laying-down of common design and construction rules 
(para. 73). 
3. It is now essential to Initiate action in this area if the whole 
exercise of completing the Internal energy market is not to be put at 
risk. The aim of the action in question Is to create a genuine oommon 
market for equipment and components, as provided for in Article 97 of 
the Euratom Treaty, and ensure its transparency; in this way it will 
be possible to reduce investments costs and Improve the 
ocmpetitivenees of the nuclear Industries. 
4. It must be stressed that this process, as stated in P3NC (para. 74), 
will take place in the oontext of a structural evolution In an 
industry which is adapting to the new dimensions of the market. 
Industrial rationalization in the design and construction of fast 
breeder power stations (equipped with fast reactors) is currently 
progressing towards an integrated structure (paras. 78 and 76). which 
has certain parallels with the developments observed in the aerospace 
sector (Airbus and Ariane). An Identical trend oould occur in the 
case of oonventional nuclear power stations (equipped with 
pressurized-water reactors - PVR) (para. 77), which, in principle, 
would not rule out activity by non-Community suppliers on the internal 
market. 
- 7 -
5. The present document, after analysing the background to and the 
medium-and long-term outlook for investments in the nuclear 
industry, particularly with regard to the setting-up of the 
"electricity oommon market", examines practical ways and means of 
dsoompartimentalizing the equipment market and the services market 
and describes the actions taken at Community level; finally, it 
presents the exemplary case of fast breeder power stations equipped 
with fast reactors, which are being developed by European efforts 
within the framework of a single project. 
6. This approach is especially necessary given that nuclear energy has 
become the most important contributor to electricity production in 
the Community. It accounted for 34% of that production In I960,3 
even though only six Member States produced electricity of nuclear 
origin in that year: Belgium (65%), Germany (34%),4 Spain (36%), 
France (70%), the Netherlands (5%) and the United Kingdom (19%). 
7. The repercussions of the Chernobyl accident on European public 
opinion, the continuing apprehension about the issue of radioactive 
waste and, on the other hand, the relative relaxation of tension 
observed on the world energy market have had the effect of 
deterring the development of nuclear programmes in several Member 
States. 
In other Member States the more recent concerns about atmospheric 
pollution and the Increase in carbon dlondde levels in the 
atmosphère militate in favour of the nuolmr option. 
We are here referring to the Community of the Twelve. In 1983, the 
year before the adoption of PINC, nuclear energy accounted for 22.4% of 
electricity production in the Community of the Ten; in the case of the 
twelve present Member States, that proportion was 21.2%. See Annex 1. 
Th.s value, however, masks considerable regional extremes; thus, 70 to 
80% of the electricity supply in northern Germany is of nuclear origin. 
- 8 -
Consequently, Belgium, Italy (which has shut down its nuclear power 
stations) and the Netherlands have chosen to defer the continuation 
of their nuclear power programmes. Furthermore, there are no 
longer any nuclear power stations under construction5 or en order 
in Germany. In Spain, the moratorium on the construction of 
nuclear power stations, instituted before Chernobyl, remains in 
force. 
The United Kingdom, on the other hand, has decided to expand its 
nuclear power capacity, basing further development on the PVR 
concept,6 the most widespread oonoept in Europe and the world as a 
whole. France will continue to invest in nuclear power as a 
function of the demand. 
The remaining Member States (Denmark, Greece, Ireland, Luxembourg 
and Portugal ; are continuing to dispense with the production of 
nuclear electricity within their territories, while potentially 
capable of importing it from other Member States or non-Community 
countries. 
All things considered, programmes of Investment in nuclear power 
stations will hence oontinue to be on a modest scale, at least 
until the resumption of activity that oould result from the need to 
replace the existing installations. 
5 With the exception of the prototype fast breeder SNR 300 at Kalkar, the 
start up of which has not yet been authorized by the public authorities 
of the land of North Rhine-Westphalia. 
6 PWR: Pressurized water reactor. 
- 9 -
B. TWVHCTHian«R TW WTTJAP prwwp 
8. In respect of certain quantitative assessments, the 1964 P3NC was based 
on assumptions - which turned out to be pmnlmlntln - oonoerning the 
lifetime of nuclear power stations and their availability: 25 to 30 
years and 60 to 65%, respectively. 
Nowadays, accumulated experience with the construction and operation of 
various types of light-water reactor, which covers over 400 reactors and 
more than 4 000 years of reactor operation throughout the world, and the 
results of many technical studies on ageing show that an average 
technical lifetime of 40 years can henceforth be envisaged. 
Availability is generally over 70%. This does not mean that the load 
factor of all power stations is currently as high; to achieve this, it 
would be necessary for all the nuclear power stations to be oalled upon 
- in response to the demand expressed by the consumers - to operate to 
the fullest extent allowed by their availability. The difference la of 
the order of 10% (64% as against 74%). Annex 2 illustrates this 
difference, oountry by country and for the Community as a whole over the 
last five years. 
Fixed ooratmlnta in thft nunlfwr pnwwr Industry 
9. Nuclear electricity oomes Into its own when production is required to 
cover sustained annual periods of maximum demand. 
In addition to highly sophisticated equipment, nuclear power stations 
require a long period of construction. At present, it is estimated 
that up to 10 years may elapse between a deoision to make an investment 
in nuclear power and the start of the corresponding installation's 
industrial operation. Since the likely technical lifetime of a nuclear 
power station is 40 years, the decision in question will have its effect 
over a period of 50 years. 
Coal-fired power stations also require a considerable Investment and a 
long construction period owing to the constraints arising from the new 
atmospheric protection standards. 
Totally different considerations form the basis for a decision 
oonoerning Investment In a power station fuelled by hydrocarbons - gas 
or oil. Ob the one hand, it takes only four years to construct the 
installation.7 On the other hand, the fuel cost is a more Important 
factor than the Investment cost. If the fuel market is persletently 
depressed, the power station oan be written off In 10 to 15 years. 
whereas, if that market la characterized by high prices, it may never be 
economically viable. 
7 And even only two years for power stations equipped with gas turbines. 
- 10 -
npMtirtwfclQn of electricity production 
10. In an electricity market based on the regional "oonoessLon" of 
consumers to producers, the concept of enrmomlo viability la a 
relative one. The producers make use of locally available 
production units In such a way as to minimize the electricity 
production cost in the concession area and pass on that oast to the 
consumers, generally under the supervision of the public 
authorities. There la no incentive to make intensive use of more 
economical means of production located In other concession areas. 
The opening up of the electricity market within the Community will make 
the concept of a regional concession relative and the concept of return 
on investments will be seen in a different light. It will then be 
possible, in particular, to ensure that every group of consumers 
benefits from the advantageous prices of any nuclear eleotricity 
produced outside the area of consumption. 
*pfte increase in electricity exchanges and the lowering of oosts on the 
internal market could also have bénéficiai effects on opportunities for 
exports from the Community. 
The impact of this development on future investments, as measured 
against the average number of power stations ordered each year, will, 
however, remain limited. This parameter, oonsldered to be one of the 
market indicators, reached a high point in 1978 (with 12 units of about 
900 MWe ordered) and la currently at its lowest point (an average of 
less than one unit ordered per year, but within the range 1300 to 1500 
MWe. If the abovementioned prospects are oonflrmed, it should settle at 
a level of one or two units per year for the next 15 to 20 years. It la 
only later, when it becomes necessary to replace ageing Installations 
after 2010, that the Indicator will rise to five or seven units per 
year. The decisions that will then be taken will oover future 
Industrial activity to beyond 2050. 
- 11 -
Competition on the world pr™*^nn-i^l1lP«"+- —-i*—•• 
12. At present, the Installed nuclear power capacity in non-Community 
countries is more than double that in the Community itself.6 It 
will not be possible to change thie ratio radically In the 
foreseeable future. Firms within the Community stand to gain 
considerably from exporting nuclear power stations; however, the 
threat of Imports Into the Community from outside firms cannot be 
disregarded. 
The Community has no power to force the European nuclear power-station 
design and construction Industry to adopt the form of organization which 
will best facilitate its access to external markets and enable it to 
withstand foreign competition. Nonetheless, the Commission believes it 
necessary, as pointed out in para: 2 above, for that industry to make 
arrangements for adopting oommon - or commonly recognized - design and 
oonstruotion rules as soon as possible9 and for the electricity 
producers, in compliance with Article 97 of the Euratom Treaty, to order 
equipment and components without restrictions based on the suppliers' 
nationalities. 
This problem as it affects power stations equipped with light-water 
reactors and those equipped with fast reactors is dealt with, 
respectively, in Sections C and D of this document. 
8 World nuclear power production is divided up approximately as follows: 
- 30% in the Community (606 TWh in 1987); 
- 28% in the USA (480 TWh In 1967) 
- 42% elsewhere, mainly in Japan and the Eastern 
European countries (746 TWh in 1987). 
9 The lack of such common rules derives from the fact that the different 
Member States have hitherto adopted nuclear power in aocordanoe with 
widely varying procedures and at different times and that the 
construction industry has hence developed on national bases. 
- 12 -
r. TOR wyTTPMow nnMPfifflWT AMP smvrnRR MAjgffP 
OcBfrlefciop of the Internal energy "* mini <wi>-jmMpr ^frfi 
When it adopted its working document on the completion of "The Internal 
Energy Market",10 the Commission wished to have the nuclear-power station 
construction sector covered by the scope of the document, account being 
taken of its special features. 
13. The Commission recently put forward proposals concerning the de 
facto opening-up of publlo works and public supply oantraots to 
intra-Community competition. 
The "Proposal for a Council Directive on the procurement procedures of 
entities providing water, energy and transport services"11 establishes 
a set of requirements concerning the procedures for selecting candidate 
and tendering firms. Its purpose la to ensure that the contracting 
entities will be able to choose the best offer from among those put 
forward by all firms within the Community which are In a position to 
oompete. 
The requirements as regards transparency and the provision of 
Information ooncern, in particular: 
(a) the transparency of the procurement prooedures and especially the 
right of access of Community suppliers to any qualification systems 
set up by contracting entities; 
(b) the obligation to communicate to the suppliers the applicable 
spécifications, even if they are internal specif 1cations; 
(o) the preferential use of European standards or common technical 
spécifications where they exist. 
The Justification for these proposals la primarily économie and is based 
on recent studies concerning cost reductions to be achieved by 
completion of the Internal market. It is also political, and the 
Governments of the Member States, at meetings of the European Council, 
have repeatedly stressed how Important it la for the Community 
Institutions to take rapidly the decisions required for opening up 
publlo sector procurement contracts. 
10 O0M(68)238, 2 May 1986 
11 0CH(88)377 final - SÏN 183, 11 October 1966. 
- 13 -
l-i. In the nuclear field, completion of the internal market was 
intended to enable the following objectives to be gradually 
attained: 
I. the boosting of the competitiveness of the Community's 
laanuf acturing industries on the world market without exoludl^' 
ether equipment manufacturers elsewhere in the world from the 
internal market; 
II. the establishment of a system of common standards with the aim of 
promoting competition on the components market, other equipment 
suppliers elsewhere in the world being obliged to comply with these 
standards whenever they offer their products on the Internal 
market; 
III. the placing of eleotrioity producers on an equal footing as regards 
their investments in nuclear power; 
IV. the "de facto" adoption by all Member States of the same extremely 
stringent safety principles and criteria for reactors, without 
diminishing national responsibility from the standpoint of 
construction permits and operating licences. 
The fripjqfrouna to the development of European fltendftTdlzAtlnn 
15. Provision has been made for other measures to supplement the 
Community system for awarding public works oontraots. The proposed 
procurement procedures will, in fact, guarantee an opening-up of 
the oontraots under consideration only if it la possible to reduce 
the differences between practices for specifying the subject matter 
of the oontraots. In such oontraots with a high technological 
content, the detailed technical specifications drawn up fcy the 
clients contribute to widening the divergence between national 
industrial practices and are a major obstacle to the proper 
functioning of the single European market. Without necessarily 
being discriminatory, the fact that they are so numerous confers an 
important advantage on a well, established supplier who knows and 
exploits their characteristic». 
It is hence necessary to ensure that a set of oommon European technical 
specifications and standards be prepared and applied. 
A work programme was drawn up and entrusted by the Commission to the 
European standardization bodies CEN/Ceneleo. It concerns identification 
of the subjects which should be dealt with as a matter of priority and 
the setting-up of detailed standardization programmes. 
- 14 -
The formulation of common European spécifications and standards will 
take time, but at least the work has begun. The existing technical 
spécifications in the excluded sectors are based on a great deal of 
oonorete experience; they will be replaced only gradually to keep pace 
with the gradual development of European standards. 
The speoifiQ features, of nu/fleAr power 
16. in the nuclear power Industry, certain aspects assume special 
significance owing to the very nature of nuclear fission and its 
industrial utilization: 
(a) First of all, the permanence and decisive Importance of oonoern 
about safety necessarily involve the pahllo safety authority in the 
supervision of a project, including power-station operation. 
(b) Secondly, the long productive lifetime expected of a nuclear power 
station (nowadays 40 years) makes it necessary to safeguard skills. 
If he has not acquired such ekme himself, the operator must be in 
a position to rely upon the technical competence of the constructor 
and the manufacturers *«itl i the installation is dismantled. 
(c) As a corollary, the extent of Investments in the nuclear sector and 
requirements regarding availability and reliability in that sector 
have brought about a services, malntenanoe and spare parts market 
of quite considerable size; centred on the existing installations, 
that market la of the same volume as the future market for the new 
units still to be constructed. 
(d) The nuclear power market is particularly narrow and oligopolistic. 
Apart from the fast breeders dealt with in the following Section, 
the development of nuclear power in the Community will henceforth 
be based almost exclusively on water reactor concepts and mainly on 
the PWR concept; 87 PWR units are In service or under 
construction. Seven Member States have now had experience with 
that reactor type to varying extents and in various forms, and only 
a small number of firms possess the know-how and the capability to 
construct such units, that is to say, mastery of the technology. 
Furthermore, the nuclear power industry, like the electromechanical 
sector of which it la a branch, la currently being restructured 
around a small number of major world-wide groups. 
- 15 -
All things considered, the relatively specific nature of the nuclear 
power industry requires that application of the policy of opening up 
public contracts be surrounded by special précautions, as pointed out in 
paras. 17 to 24 below. 
Standardization in the nuclear power industry 
17. Although the present new nuclear equipment market is considerably 
smaller that that in the late 1970s, standardization in the TT"v?lefw 
power Industry is an important action. First of all, it forms part 
of the standardization of all electricity generating equipment, 
Including all sources of primary energy. Without it, it would be 
impossible to open up the different national markets, some of which 
are nowadays mainly nuclear while others are closed to that form of 
energy, on a balanced basis. 
Furthermore, although the component market Is often occupied by a small 
number of firms, standardization will bring about uniformity and 
facilitate putting projects up for tender. Finally, it may assist the 
industry to evolve towards a more rational industrial structure, better 
adapted to the size of the market, and thus contribute to maintaining 
skills in the more efficient European firms. 
13. The standardization action will focus on the following points: 
(a) Establishment of a working method for identification of needs for 
European standards which could be used by authorities awarding 
public contracts. The following sectors in the nuclear power 
Industry are targeted here: 
I. Mechanical components; 
H. Electrical components; 
in.Services; 
IV. Civil engineering; 
V. Spécifications of a horizontal nature: certification 
of products and processes, qualification of suppliers, 
quality assurance, test, monitoring, analytical and 
inspection methods, eto. 
- 16 -
(b) Proposal of the features to be covered by the envisaged standards 
with a view to promoting their application, particularly in the 
field of publio contracts; 
(c) Identification of the subjects to be dealt with as a matter of 
priority in aooordanoe with their eoonomio importance, their 
technical feasibility and their desirability; 
(d) Establishment of detailed standardization programmes and 
timetables. 
This action will be geared mainly to the technology of light-water 
reactors, which is the predominant technology In Europe and throughout 
the world. 
Stnndflrdlaitton and nuclear flftfety 
19. There la an interface between standardization in the nuclear power 
Industry and the safety aspects. Indeed, every plan for a nuclear 
power station has to be approved in its entirety by the safety 
authorities, who deliver their opinion not only with regard to the 
safety principles and criteria, but also in respect of the 
manufacturing spécifications and standards applied in the project. 
The project developer (the client or the Industrial architect 
acting in his name; is thus encouraged to use technical 
spécifications and manufacturing standards approved at national 
level; this practice consolidates the lntra-Community partitioning 
of the market and may even encourage a preference for suppliers in 
a non-Community oountry (at present the USA) when the project 
design is derived directly from a model proposed by a constructor 
in that oountry. 
In order to create a single market, it la hence essential to associate 
the safety authorities with the nuclear standardization programme. 
At Community level, experts from the national safety authorities, 
together with representatives of industry and the electricity producers, 
participate in the activities of a working group dealing with the 
'Technological safety of thermal reactors (methods, criteria, codes and 
standards;". That group's work on nuclear power station safety was 
recently the subject of a oommunioatian from the Commission to the 
Council,12 in respect of which the Council has just delivered its 
opinion.13 
12 0CM(88)788. 
13 Of 20 June 1969. 
- 17 -
The group, which has already conducted a number of exploratory studies 
in the field of nuclear standard 1 zat.1 on, la the Cbnolasion's preferred 
partner in taking steps to form a link between safety and 
standard! ration and in contributing to the establishment of a working 
method which will take that Interface fully into account. In addition, 
it provides a certain degree of assurance that the future standards will 
be favourably received hy the national safety authorities. 
20. The results of the standardization activities will be submitted by 
the Commission to the Community's group of experts on the 
technological safety of nuclear Installations for its opinion. 
The standardization programme implemented for Industrial purposes is an 
activity distinct from the process of harmonizing safety criteria. 
Nonetheless, it is complementary to it and its execution should have a 
synergistic effect on the evolution of that process. 
Hence, In the shortest possible time, the design, construction and 
operation of nuclear power stations will take place under optimum 
technical conditions, reflecting. In the specific sector of the nuclear 
power industry, the concerns about levels of protection that are 
addressed in the Single Act without the responsibilities of the Member 
States being affected. 
Competition a*A 1 nrtmgtr't»! «trocfarre 
21. It has hitherto been possible to consider formally that there is a 
state of competition on the internal nuclear power market, since 
several design and construction firms have been active on the 
mrkets in the Member States. However, such competition had little 
effect in practice. This is refleoted even at sub-ccntraoting 
level, where lntra-Community flow, which from the outset has been 
modest, la decreasing. 
Furthermore, competition within Member States where there was more than 
one constructor was also more formal than real. 
In these States - as in the others - the low level of market activity, 
measured against the number of units ordered over a given period, 
combined with the absence of a national oonstruotor capable of 
constructing an entire nuclear power station from start to finish, 
prompted clients to deal "first with one and then with another" of the 
few firms active in that field. They sought more to try cooperating 
with these constructors one after another than to benefit from 
competition between them. This is confirmed by studying the investment 
costs. 
- 18 -
22. In this connection, the Commission occupies a privileged position: 
not only does it participate in the work of UNIPEDB14 oonoemlng 
the estimated cost of Installations possibly to be placed In 
service over a 10-year period, but it receives and - under a 
confidential procedure - discusses with the investors pursuant to 
Articles 41 â£_ââg of the Euratom Treaty all the information which 
enables it to determine the cost of each installation and break it 
down by major items. 
This privileged position allows it to establish that achievement of low 
costs for a nuclear power investment as a whole mainly depends on the 
investor's organizational and engineering capacity and on the effect of 
series production backed up by investment programming. 
On the basis of these facts, the Commission concludes that it is 
advisable to seek more specifically to coordinate investments in the 
nuclear power Industry within the Community as provided for by 
Chapter IV of the Euratom Treaty. 
Current developments 
23. In the recent past (late 1988/early 1969), an important world-wide 
trend has emerged towards coopération between major Industrial 
groups, some of which directly affect the nuclear power-station 
designers and constructors. 
m the Community, the constructors Framatome, France, and Siemene/KWU, 
Federal Republio of Germany, have just signed an agreement to set up a 
joint subsidiary, NPI (Nuclear Power International). 
This agreement, which concerns the development of nuclear power stations 
for export to markets outside France and Germany, does not provide for 
reciprocal opening-up of the Germany and French nuclear power station 
markets, which cannot be decided on by the equipment or component 
suppliers, although it may be anticipated that, in the long term, one or 
more identical products will be proposed and manufactured under it.15 
However, it represents the appearance of a powerful industrial group, 
amounting to a European solution as compared with the agreements already 
concluded or being negotiated by the Industries In other Member States 
interested in nuclear power with Industries in non-Community oountries: 
the United States of America, Switzerland/Sweden and even Japan. 
14 Union Internationale des Producteurs et Distributeurs d'Energie 
Electrique (International Union of Producers and Distributers of 
ELectrioal Energy). 
15 This could happen as the result of rationalization of production by both 
associates. These products would hence oomply, not only with the same 
nianufacturing specifications (standardization aspect), but also with 
identicial safety requirements. In this regard, it should be noted that 
the agreement also provides for the pooling of systems development 
efforts proposed by both firms with a view to developing new models of 
light-water nuclear power stations. 
- 19 -
In comparison with the latter, which possess the technology and are 
capable of developing it, the European industries - other than Framatome 
and Siemens/KWU - are mainly playing the role of technology Importers 
and it is not easy to see how they oould disseminate such technology on 
any European markets other than their own national markets, oontrary to 
Article 97 of the Euratom Treaty. 
Were such to be the oase, each developer (constructor, electricity 
producer or even safety inspectorate) oould still be tempted to maintain 
the special characteristics of his product and to sing the praises of 
one or other safety-related aspect; this might jeopardize the attainment 
of the objectives of the Internal market in the nuclear field, 
particularly the establishment of a system of common standards and the 
adoption of the same safety principles and criteria (para. 20). 
Ana.1 yrta of thA rami ftft-r-pnuwrr m«T»At 
24. With an oligopolistic market on which competition between potential 
suppliers is subject to very spécial oondltions and. In the oase of 
oertaln components, investor demand ia oonfronted with a soarolty 
of supply, completion of the European Internal market must be 
accompanied by spécial precautions, although there la not 
necessarily a need to provide for a regulatory framework. 
In order better to assess the state of the market in question, the 
Commission will set up a group of experts for the nuclear power market 
which it will consult periodically on the situation 1A this market and 
its likely future trends. 
This group, which will be chaired by a Commission representative, will 
be made up of representatives of the investors oanoerned, chiefly 
electricity producers. 
It must be the Commission's task, assisted by the group of experts, to 
examine in particular the methods of implementation and the results of 
the following actions by undertakings: 
(a) Identification of components which might be difficult to supply in 
quantity (volume and/or high cost of components on offer) and which 
give rise to problems of quality (ability of the suppliers to 
comply with the spécifications). 
Accordingly, during the requisite updating of the prooedure for applying 
Articles 41 ejLSjao; of the EABC Treaty (Council Regulation No 4 and 
Commission Regulation No 1) and the updating of Annex n to the Treaty, 
the Commission will request that Information on sensitive components 
(suppliers consulted; supplier chosen) be oommunioated to it. 
- 20 -
(b) taking stock of the similarities and dissimilarities between the 
light-water reactor projects developed in the Community. 
(c) drawing up of a Hat of requirements which would be likely to 
receive the approval of all the Community electricity producers 
oonoerned; 
(d) use of the form of the "Joint Undertaking" provided for in 
Chapter V of the Euratom Treaty for the development of a European 
reference model derived from these projects. 
The putting Into effect of such measures win facilitate the 
coordinated development of investments (within the meaning of 
Article 40) in such way as to obtain the maximum benefit from the 
effect of series production and the planning of the work. 
- 21 -
D. AN ISttMPLg OF OOTERATICM: TBE CASE OP TOR VAST TTORnRP 
ihe value to ffirrope of the, frtfrti rmotor 
26. The fast reactor provides a form of nuclear fission energy which 
enables the potential er-argy yield of uranium to be fully utilized, 
instead of only exploit'-:? some 1% as la the case with reactors of 
the present generation. 
From an energy standpoint, the adoption of the fast reactor oonoept -
in parallel with reactors of the present generation - oould thus prolong 
the life of uranium resouroes without creating tension on the world 
market for this sensitive raw material. 
For this reason, several European oountries - and other countries 
elsewhere in the world such as the USA, the USSR, Japan and India - are 
developing fast reactor technology. From the outset, the Cctoaunity has 
contributed in various ways to this development. 
A new stage began in 198416 with the coopération agreement between five 
Member States (Belgium, Germany, France, Italy and the United Kingdom). 
The purpose of that agreement, which can be extended to other partners, 
is to render the oonoept competitive with light-water reactors on the 
European market. 
In addition to its fundamental value from the energy standpoint, this 
objective thus possesses an eoonomio and an Industrial aspect which are 
of special relevance to the field covered by this document, since the 
fast reactor can, if the need arises, be adopted as an option in a 
single European market. 
The (3on^t.iMvwrwra nf thA fAgt raantny 
26. The ociiiftarolal competitiveness of the fast reactor should be 
assessed by comparing its eoonomio efficiency with that of the 
concepts it is likely to replace under the conditions obtaining 
when the replacement is carried out, i.e., at the beginning of the 
next century. 
It is hence Inappropriate to compare, as has been done In the recent 
past, the cost of the first large-scale prototype (Superphenix) with 
that of the cheaper PWRs constructed in series in France. 
16 Signed on 10 January 1964 in Paris (see also the 19Ô4 PINC, para. 41) 
- 22 -
Detailed studies, including some oarried out by the Commission with the 
assistance of UNIPEDB, have shown that significant progress could be 
made and that fast reactors could be competitive by the beginning of the 
next oentury. 
ThA InrtitfftriAl tutptnta of the f*at. ™*|ot,nT: the EFR project 
27. Developing a new reactor concept is expensive, but the stakes here 
are very high. It is for tola reason that the European countries 
currently involved (see para. 25) have decided to rationalize their 
efforts and implement five seotoral agreements relating to the 
following subjects: R3D, Information, industry, investment and 
fuel. The agreements on the first three subjects are now 
operative.1' 
The main objective was to combine the three projects developed in the 
Europe18 into a single European project. The 1984 PINC foresaw that 
this union would take place after each of the three projects had come to 
fruition. It also stressed the value of setting up an appropriate 
industrial structure, preferably an Integrated one. 
At the request of the electricity producers concerned, European 
constructors joined together to submit a proposal containing the main 
features of a single project.19 
Henceforth, the single European project EFR (European Fast Reactor) will 
serve as a reference for the eoonomio assessments. 
28. In addition to Initiating an appropriate Industrial structure, the 
EFR project has other advantageous aspects: it enables the 
qualities of the various national industries to be used to best 
advantage and unites the conditions for placing on the market at 
the appropriate time a single product designed to meet the 
requirements of any Member State that may become involved. The EFR 
will be the most efficient and least expensive fast reactor 
possible and will be aooeptable to all the national safety 
authorities associated with the project design.80 
17 Signed in Bonn on 16 February 1989. 
18 "Project 1500" developed by Novatome (Framatome) (France) and Ansaldo 
(Italy), SNR 2 developed bv Interatam QnbH (Siemens-KWU) (Germany), 
Belgcnuoléaire SA (Belgium; and Neratoom b.v. (the Netherlands) and CDFR 
developed by the National Nuclear Corporation (GBC) (United Kingdom). 
19 For its part, the Commlaslon had previously requested industry to 
conduct a comparison of the three projects. 
20 From a formal standpoint, the safety authority exercises its 
responsibility only during the licensing procedure; however, it is in 
the general Interest for it to be informed in some way of the state of 
progress of the project. 
- 23 -
Moreover, EFR provides the most appropriate framework for the 
develqpaent of a set of standards applicable throughout the Community. 
(It will be noted that the Commission Working Group on Codes and 
Standards, made up of fast reactor experts from the Member States, will 
provide the EFR project with the results of its work relating to that 
project). 
Those countries which prefer to dispense with the construction of a fast 
reactor will find that the insistence of the electricity "oommon market" 
will also guarantee them a power supply in the very long term. 
Finally, in keeping with the statements made by the partners currently 
associated with the development of the EFR, participation in further 
work on the project is open to other Industrial firms and other 
electricity producers in aooordanoe with procedures to be determined by 
those concerned. For its part, the Commission will encourage such a 
development. 
Follow-up action and the responsibility of the pihllo authorities 
29. If the existing Installations have to be replaced, this will be the 
occasion to usher in the fast reactor concept. 
For this reason, it has been agreed that the EFR project should undergo, 
half way through the next decade, an exhaustive and detailed assessment 
covering, in particular, the economic and safety aspects. This 
assessment will enable the developers and the Community to adjust the 
research policies accordingly and/or to propose that investments be 
made. 
Continuation of development work with a view, in particular, to 
achieving an additional lowering of the investment and operating costs 
cannot be left solely in the hands of future investors. It is the 
responsibility of the public authorities to attend to the long-term 
energy supply conditions and to assist in the development of promising 
concepts up to and Including the precaaoercial phase. For the 
Commission's part, in view of the responsibilities conferred upon it 
under Article 40 of the Euratom Treaty, it is particularly desirable for 
it to be associated with the assessment of the EFR project. 
- 24 -
F. gunrnnTnHft 
The purpose of this oommunioation is to define and initiate the prooess of 
completing the equipment and component internal market in the nuclear power 
sector. 
30. By examining the characteristics of this sector and the problems 
which the undertakings encounter in it: the nuclear power station 
design and construction industries - the suppliers -, an the one 
hand, and, on the other hand, the electricity production Industries 
- the Investors -, this oommunioation has highlighted the following 
salient points: 
(a) generally speaking, it is necessary for the suppliers to organize 
in such a way that it will be possible to formulate cannon - or 
commonly recognized - design and oonstruotion rules within a short 
time and the investors will be able to order equipment and 
components without any restrictions based on the suppliers' 
nationalities (para. 12). 
(b) as regards the approach envisaged, it should enable the following 
objectives to be attained gradually (para. 14): 
I. a boosting of the competitiveness of the Community's 
manufacturing industries on the world market, without the 
exclusion of other equipment manufacturers elsewhere in the 
world from the internal market; 
H. the establishment of a system of common standards which 
will promote competition on the components market and will 
have to be oomplied with by other equipment suppliers 
elsewhere in the world when they offer their products on 
the Internal market; 
m. the placing of electricity producers on an equal footing as 
regards their investments In nuclear power; 
IV. the "de facto" adoption by all the Member States of the 
same safety principles and criteria for reactors without 
any weakening of national responsibility from the 
standpoint of construction permits and operating licences. 
(c) In order to minimize the detriment caused by the narrowness of the 
market - measured against the expected rate of ordering in the 
foreseeable future - from the standpoint of investment costs, it is 
advisable to seek more specifically to coordinate investments in 
nuclear power within the Community (para. 22). 
- 28 -
(d) As regards ensuring long-term electricity supplies and the 
rationalization of the necessary technological and Industrial 
development, the EFR fast breeder reactor project will henceforth 
be the focal point of European efforts; In the main, this project 
la in keeping with the objectives set out In sub-paragraph (b; 
above and, In accordance with procedures to be determined by those 
concerned, suppliers and Investors other than those Initially 
involved In the project will be able to participate in it 
(para. 28). 
31. At the operational level, the Onmmlselon will: 
(a) Initiate a standardization action specific to the nival ear power sector (para. 18) which will supplement the general standardization programme already being implemented (para. 17); 
(b) associate the working group an technological safety with the nuclear power standardization action by submitting to it the progress reports for its opinion; this procedure, which oaunot be substituted for the formal agreement of the national safety authorities in respect of the future oommon standards, will nonetheless have the advantage of increasing the likelihood of this agreement being obtained at the appropriate time (para. 20); 
(o) update the prooedures (Council Regulation No 4 and Omission 
Regulation NO 1) for implementing Articles 41 ejLflOg of the Euratom Treaty and Annex II thereto (para. 24); 
(d) examine, with a view to better facilitating the ooordlnated development of Investments (Chapter IV of the Euratom Treaty) (para. 24) and assisted by a group of experts, the prooedures for Implementation and the results of the actions oarrled out by 
iinrtfmfcftirii^gff t which include: 
I. the identification of components liable to give rise to 
difficulties of supply; 
II. taking stock of the similarities and dissimilarities between the light-water reactor projects developed In the Community; 
m. drawing up of a Hat of requirements which is likely to 
meet with the approval of all the electricity producers In the Community involved in these projects; 
IV. making use of the "Joint Undertaking" (Chapter V of the Euratom Treaty) to establish a European reference model derived from these projects; 
(e) encourage efforts Intended to lead, halfway through the next decade, to an assessment being made of the single European fast breeder reactor project EFR, by being associated with that assessment (para. 29). 
ANNEX,. 1 
PROPORTION OF ELECTRICITY PRODUCTION IN THE EEC ACCOUNTED. FOR.BY NUCLEAR POWER (1980-88) 
CSOUnCC "EOffOSTAT*) 
ttinmnnifwwiiiuiimimiiHiiiiiimitiiMiMmnHMlillMW 
.Country lno m l981 , 1982 m ^j x ja^ . j^gj w 1?fi4 ^ ^fi7 ; 1983 ^ 
» ••• ". * •• a '. '. . a ' . a' .«';'«.' a * 
•#. a • .' a. • tt a •• '». a • *• "a a «. 
«8etgiu* 23,3.a 25,4 s 30,5 a 45,7 a 50,8 a 60,3 * 67,2 a 66,0 * 6$,$ • 
• "' a. ' . a • • a a • » . • a a . r K * 
-j- - - .- y —-• -- m ^»' • Ja* —* — .. -... . _ *^aaai •• aaj^ a^^Tlai^-i.1 — -i— ••^fr n~ T'M •!.— — ^_ ^ ,»• „ 
.*• * a a «• .»'• a . a' ''. a' * ••* 
•SjSain «; 4>7 a 8,6 « 7,7 » 9,1 a 19,3 « 22,2 a 29,3 a 31,7 « 36,1 # 
«• - e . . a a ' a a a . a »' s • «• 
• _.»•'» = a- at s • . a. • 9 a « 
#pr*ncea 23;5 m 37,7 a 38,7 a 43,3 a 58,7 a 64,9 s 69*8 « 69.8 * 69,9-'» 
• #• • "a' a •• a a" s a • a e ' a • • * 
• . a. a -a . • •«• • a; . a ". 'c • 'a s V 
• I*alya 1,2 a 1,5 a 3,8 a 3,2 a 3,8 a 3,fl a 3,8* - s - * 
* • '• . a . , a a,- .a .• 'a •• a a * *' 
a. * -«« « a u a. '*'«.•* 
<NetJierr« 6,4 ». 5,6 a 6.4 « 5,9 a- 5,8 = 6,1. a- 6,1 a 5,2 - 5.2 • 
•lands * * ". ,'" * * s ,"...'" " ° 
• . s "! a'-- •. . s •• • • .a ' . '• a a • ' . a- ' : s- . * • ' ••» • 
• V*\ , I2yl * 12,8 a 15,2 a 17,0 * 17,9 e 19,4 a 18,4 a 17,5 * 19,3 & 
'•.-.-' • a a • a ..'••»•'.•' a ': a ;« « » . 
''• :'-v.- a- a a .' . a" a'- • a ' a •••.»' . a * 
• EEC a 11,7 a 16>0 a 17,8 a 21,2 a 26,4 a 30,7 a 32,3 a 32,4 a 33,9 * 
*.'*..'•••.. * " . '. •' " "«' • a « • -s ; «• 
ANNEX 2 
UMj^WLmtfn_ FACTORS OF_THE NMCL€A|R POWER ST^llWiS lU TH^ EEC ^ 
...—....... - r (sqorçi:,c5RosTAr) :~ 
• •• 
Country 
• 
• 
jtelgiuoj 
>d. ; 
Germany 
•-• « 
^Francea 
* a 
• • .' • a 
•Italy . 
• •• • 
• . * 
•Nethtr* 
•lands * 
• • « 
*UK . 
«• • •. a 
•'•• « 
. »EEC • »' 
• # a '•'". 19 8 4 i 
'Load > 
» Avail. • 
«8a,6 s 
I. . 1 
• 86,7 « 
: 78,8 a 
t •* 
L 79,0 • 
r • • • 
a 
i. " a 
70,8 ..'•• • 
i. -'a 
76,1 a 
39,5 a 
a 
39.5 a 
78,5 a 
* 
78,5 a 
61.7 a 
. a-
64.9 a 
72,6 a 
a-
"'3,4 « • •• : • • • • | 
= 19 8 5: 
t Load a 
• Avail.* 
> 82,0 a 
X • « 
t 83,0 « 
• 84,0 « 
i . , * 
» . 83,0 • 
«64,6 « 
i a 
'M a 
: 74,0 « 
a 
78,0 a 
61,0 9 
a 
62,0 a 
82,0 a 
a 
. 82,0 a 
,:8Z,6-" .; . . a' 
.a 
84,0 a 
78,0 a 
•'••'" •'. 
80,0 a » 19 8 6 « 
r Load 4 
»••"." Avail.i 
i -7*.0 « 
i.i 
i 83,0 i 
78,0 • • ; ' • 
1." » 
80,0 a 
73,0 à 
a 
74,0 « 
70,0 ; a 
.'a 
76,0 a 
75,0 a 
. a 
75,0 at 
90,0 a 
a 
9o,o ;.ù 
61,0 a 
-. 'a 
61,0 » 
71,0 a 
' ' a 
76*0 > >»•»•*«••••#• a i 
P ' • « 
K 19 8 7 i 
». Load i 
« Availi 
• 83,0 « 
t a 
t 84,0 a 
t 75,0 • 
i . • a 
i 80,0 a 
> 80,0; - a 
i a 
82,0 a 
72>0 a 
1,0 a 
2,0 a 
75,0 a 
77,0 a 
oiyo •••/, -
- a 
62,0 a 
6*,0 a 
a 
73,0 a ai . 
« 19 8 8 
i Load < 
i Avail..{ 
t 84,8 < 
r 85,2 < 
• 73,6 H 
i 84,4 « 
75,7 * 
79,3 « 
58,8 « 
« 
71,1 « 
• 
,0 • 
73,1 * 
• 
80,0 • 
58,7 * 
65,1 * 
64,1 * 
' # 
7tt,0 • 
EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE ENERG/167 
Brussels, 19 December 1989 
OPINION 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
on 
NUCLEAR INDUSTRIES IN THE COMMUNITY 
The nuclear power station design and construction industry and 
completion of the European Market 
(Update of the Illustrative Nuclear Programme for the Community 
(PINO 
- Article 40 of the EURATOM Treaty -
(COM(89) 347) 
Rapporteur: Mr CAMPBELL 
CES 1365/89 PF/CCP/ht 
Rue Ravenstein, 2 B- 1000 BRUSSELS Tel. 519 90 11 Fax 513 48 93 
- 1 
On 18 September 1989 the Commission decided to consult the Economic and Social 
Committee, under Article 40 of the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, on the 
Nuclear industries in the Community • the nuclear power station design 
and construction industry and completion of the European Single Market 
(update of the Illustrative Nuclear Programme for the Community - PINC) 
(COM(89) 347). 
The Section for Energy, Nuclear Questions and Research, which was responsible for 
preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its Opinion on 30 November 1989. The 
Rapporteur was Mr CAMPBELL. 
At its 272nd Plenary Session (meeting of 19 December 1989) the Economic and Social 
Committee unanimously adopted the following comments: 
While endorsing in general the update of the 1985 Illustrative Nuclear Programme, 
the Committee has doubts about the timeliness of this document and would make a number of 
comments which are detailed below. 
1. Preliminary comments 
1.1. Under Article 40 of the EURATOM Treaty, the Commission is obliged to publish periodically 
"illustrative programme indicating in particular nuclear energy production targets and all types of 
investment required for their attainment". Therefore the objective of the PINC is only to set the 
framework for future nuclear power. 
1.2. Three programmes have been published to date, the latest in 198511'. The present 
document is a partial update of the objectives and recommendations contained in the 1985 programme, 
namely those concerning nuclear power station design and construction. 
1.3. The approach to nuclear power has changed considerably since the 1984 illustrative 
programme, following the Chernobyl accident. One of the Committee's conclusions on the 1984 
programme was to "highlight the major importance of greater Community political will in the implementation 
of programmes concerning the various aspects of nuclear energy"'2'. 
il) COM<85> 401 final - 23 July 1985. 
(2) CES 472/85 - 30 Mav 1985 - point 4. 
CES 1365/89 ht 
2 -
1.4. Since then, public concern, in particular, has had, as stated by the Commission in 
its document, "the effect of deterring the development of nuclear programmes in severe! Member 
States". Some of them have deferred the continuation of their nuclear power programmes, other 
have slowed down or stopped nuclear station construction. 
1.5. Nevertheless, it has to be recalled, that in 1988, nuclear energy accounted for 34% 
of electricity production in the Community (compared to about 22% in 1983), even though only 
six Member States produced electricity of nuclear origin.'31 
1.6. The Commission's present document is intended neither to deal with nuclear power 
production - this will be the subject of a comprehensive update in 1992 - nor to open a political 
debate in favour or against the nuclear option, in relation to environmental concerns, in particular. 
1.7. Secondly, it is not intended to deal with nuclear safety, either of power station operation 
or of workers in the stations or of the general public. The matter of safety was the subject of 
a separate Commission Communication on "Assurance of safety of nuclear power plants" (COM(88) 
788 final of February 1988). 
1.8. In that context, the Committee would underline the clear difference between design 
standards and the safety principles and criteria which preside over the licensing of nuclear power 
stations by national authorities. Nevertheless, it should also be stressed, as the Commission does 
in its document, that there is an interface between common standards and the safety aspects, 
since manufacturing specifications and standards have to be approved by national safety authorities. 
Design standards are dependant on previously determined safety standards. 
1.9. The objective of the present PINC is to review the short and long term requirements 
for nuclear power stations and suggest ways in which, in relation to the completion of the internal 
market by 1992, the specifications for design and construction can be harmonized in the Community 
in order to improve the economics of production, to standardize safety requirements for design, 
to improve the conditions for competition in a limited Community market and to afford opportunity 
for a strong Community industry to compete in world markets. 
1.10. The Commission suggests that the present low level of nuclear power station requirements 
will continue for another 1 5/20 years or so. Thereafter, unless new forms of energy production 
are developed, all the existing sources of energy, including nuclear power, will be required to meet 
demand. As 
(3) See Annex 1 and 2 to C0Mt89) 347. 
CES 1365/89 ht 
existing stations become life-expired after some 40 years of operation, the replacement of existing 
installations will therefore be required. A firm plan for replacement will, however, be required 10 
to 15 years before existing plants can be effectively replaced. 
1.11. Nuclear power generations will probably be available in the form of advanced pressurized 
water reactors (PWR) or as Fast Breeder Reactors (FBR), which are likely to be available in the time scale. 
2. General comments 
2.1. The Committee reviewed the existence of codes and standards available in the EEC 
(France, UK, the Federal Republic of Germany), in the USA and in the International Atomic Energy 
Agency. Diverse standards exist and there is no doubt that if it can be achieved, a European standard 
for Advanced PWR's and for FBR's would be beneficial. 
2.2. The production of codes and standards is a lengthy and costly process. The Commission 
document appears to set a target of harmonization in a timescale of the 1992 single market. The 
Committee believes that comprehensive common standards, acceptable to all Community States, 
will take longer to produce and should be directed towards the increasing requirements after the year 2000. 
2.3. These requirements are likely to be identified more specifically once the 1995 Energy 
objectives have been reviewed. This review, which will take place in 1990, is likely to give a more 
positive impetus to the need for harmonization in the decade 1990-2000. This is the reason why 
the Committee expresses some doubts as to the need for the present partial update of the PINC 
prior to a complete and in-depth review planned for 1992. 
2.4. Despite these doubts about timing the Committee does broadly agree with the analysis 
set out in the Programme and the conclusions as applied specifically to safety and common standards 
of design and construction. This does not pre-empt its Opinion on the present situation and future 
development of investments in the nuclear field and of nuclear power programmes, or on the Safety 
of Operation of Nuclear Power Stations. 
2.5. On the assumption that there is going to be a need for a replacement of life-expired 
power stations, it is prudent for the Community to combine its total technical and production resources 
to enable more effective competition among European nuclear contractors in a limited market and 
thus to obtain maximum economic benefit, through the harmonization of the various elements of 
design and construction, both for Advanced PWR's and FBR's and the completion of a Single European 
Market for supply and construction. 
CES 1365/89 ht 
4 -
2.6. In addition to the general endorsement of the principles of PINC, the Committee has 
a number of specific comments which it believes are relevant. 
3. Specific comments 
3.1. It seems that the PINT concentrâtes on the largest installations of Advanced PWR's 
and FBfi's. The future development of new reactor concepts especially of smaller next generation 
plants, which could have a market beyond Community boundaries, should not be neglected. 
3.2 At a time of low demand, consideration should be given to how best to use limited 
resources on the very large amount of work required to achieve harmonisation. Concentration of 
effort should be directed towards the requirements of the next century and should not necessarily 
be geared to the timetable of the Single European Market of 1993. 
3.3. Whilst accepting that PINC is in effect a conceptual document and not an executive 
plan it would have been helpful if the actions and results which had emanated from previous programmes 
had been discussed and used as a firm foundation on which to base the 1989 PINC. 
3.4. It is assumed that harmonisation can be achieved by extensive discussion. There is 
no central authority which will impose standards. It is therefore essential that all competent authorities 
should be represented in the CEN/CENELEC discussions and that standards should not be dictated 
unilaterally by powerful commercial interests in industry. 
3.5. It is a general problem that whilst seeking harmonisation within the Community, innovation 
based on research and testing by responsible authorities worldwide should not be inhibited by rigid 
standardisation. There must be the capability of amending standards to take advantage of scientific advance. 
3.6. The PINC does not envisage the use of the Joint Research Centre, despite its major 
role in nuclear safety and prenormative research. Whilst it is accepted that the task is mainly to 
harmonise a multitude of existing standards, full use should be made of the JRC, as an impartial 
and independent technical expert. In this respect, attention is drawn to the comments the Committee 
has made in its Opinion on the Proposal for a Council Decision concerning the Framework Programme 
for Community activities in the field of research and technological development (1990-1994)(4). 
3.7. One of the conclusions of the Committee's Opinion on the 1984 PINC related to the 
decommissioning of power stations and storage, reprocessing and disposal of nuclear waste. There is 
i4, CLC :^ay/39ot '5 Novemoc 1983. 
CES 1365.S9 ht 
- 5 
no mention in the present document of these important matters. Whilst it is rt cognised "it the 
are specific research programmes in these areas the Committee believes that harmonisation of design 
in all these operations should be part of any comprehensive PINC. 
3.8. In a number of its Opinions and Reports over recent years the Committee has urged 
the preparation of a widespread public information service on all aspects of nuclear power. There 
is unfortunately no significant mention of this in the 1989 PINC. Whether or not future use of 
nuclear power is essential or is politically acceptable, there is no doubt that the present generation 
of power stations will be in operation for many years, that some construction will continue both 
within the Community and elsewhere in the world. It is essential that the public should be informed 
by responsible authorities as to the present and future state of the industry and should not have 
to rely on less well informed and possibly biased sources. Whatever may be the future of nuclear 
power it will depend on the support of a well informed public. 
4. Conclusion 
4.1. The Committee has expressed doubts about the need for this document, at this time. 
Subject to this reservation, it endorses in general the content of this partial update of the 1985 
Illustrative Nuclear Programme for the Community - PINC - as an interim statement of intent. 
4.2. The Committee looks forward to the revision, in 1990, of the 1995 energy objectives 
for the Community and a further in depth revision of the PINC in 1992. 
Done at Brussels, 19 December 1989. 
The Chairman The Secretary-General 
of the Economic and of the Economic and 
Social Committee Social Committee 
Alberto MASPRONE Jacques MOREAU 
CES 1365/89 ht 
ISSN 0254-1475 
COM(89) 347 final 
DOCUMENTS 
EN 12 16 13 
7.8.1989 
Catalogue number : CB-CO-89-381-EN-C 
ISBN 92-77-52687-4 
Office for Official Publications of the European Communities 
L-2985 Luxembourg