30. 12. 89 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 329/23 
5.8. The comments made in respect of Annex 4.II 
also apply to Annex 4.Ill ('Generic types of dangerous 
waste'). 
6. Conclusion 
The Committee, whilst endorsing the aim of the draft 
Directive, believes that: there is no legal obstacle for an early application of 
Annex III of MARPOL 73/78 at the discretion of 
EC Member States, and 
there is room for closer cooperation between the 
Community and IMO with a view to achieving 
a closer alignment with international standards, 
without detracting in any way from the competence 
of Member States in that forum. 
Done at Brussels, 18 October 1989. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Alberto MASPRONE 
Opinion on the proposal for a Council Decision adopting a specific research and technical 
development programme for the European Atomic Energy Community (EAEC), in the field 
of management and storage of radioactive waste (1990-1994) (') 
(89/C 329/09) 
On 5 June 1989 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under 
Article 170 of the EAEC Treaty, on the abovementioned proposal. 
The Section for Energy, Nuclear Questions and Research, which was responsible for preparing 
the Committee's work on the matter, adopted its Opinion on 6 October 1989. The Rapporteur 
was Mr Plum. 
At its 270th plenary session (meeting of 18 October 1989) the Economic and Social Committee 
adopted the following Opinion unanimously. 
1. General assessment 
The specific research and development programme on 
the management and storage of radioactive waste comes 
under the framework programme for Community 
activities in the field of research and technological 
development (1987-1991) (2). 
This is already the fourth 5-year programme on the 
management and storage of radioactive waste and it 
covers the period 1990-1994. Community funds total­
ling 79,6 million ECU have been earmarked for this 
research programme. 
In its proposal the Commission explains in great detail 
and convincingly how necessary it is that the work 
started as early as 1973 on radioactive waste manage­
ment should be carried on. The Commission also points out that the current programme (1985-1989) (3) (whose 
main results are also set out in the Commission docu­
ment) must be continued with a further supplementary 
programme in order to ensure the management of radio­
active waste with the highest degree of safety in the 
short and long term. 
The Committee expressly welcomes, in general terms, 
the fourth 5-year programme for further Community 
research on radioactive waste management proposed 
by the Commission and the Opinions of the advisory 
committees on this programme. 
2. General comments on the disposal of special waste 
All fields of technical activity (research, medicine, 
industry, housekeeping, etc.) give rise to waste that has 
(i) OJNoC 144, 10.6. 1989, p. 11. 
(2) OJ No L .302, 24. 10. 1987, p. 1 ct scq. (•') OJ No L 83, 25. 3. 1985, p. 20 et seq. 
No C 329/24 Official Journal of the European Communities 30. 12. 89 
to be disposed of. The radiological toxicity of the waste 
from the nuclear industry causes particular problems. 
It is clear that coping with the waste problems of 
an industrial society calls for extensive research and 
development efforts in a number of scientific fields and 
for coordinated action on the part of the political 
authorities. 
'Disposal' in this context means the destruction, trans­
formation or safe storage of waste. The aim is to protect 
the biosphere, human beings, animals and plants from 
pollutants. 
From the point of view of operational efficiency waste 
disposal is usually a negative factor which is liable to 
be shifted onto the public sector. From the overall 
macroeconomic and social policy angles, the 'polluter 
pays' principle is of decisive importance for the 
apportionment of the health and economic costs. 
In industrial development hitherto, waste has been dis­
posed of at low cost (both to industry and to the 
consumer) in water courses, the atmosphere and the 
soil. As industry has become more concentrated and 
living standards have risen, the ecological balance has 
been increasingly disturbed. The aim now must there­
fore be to remove the disturbances to the ecological 
balance (caused by conventional waste) and to allow 
no disturbance to arise from nuclear waste. 
An urgent task for the future is to classify as compre­
hensively as possible the waste requiring disposal, in 
order to be able to determine the best disposal methods. 
In this way the protection of human health and the 
predictability of the costs to be borne by industry will 
be improved. 
3. Specific aspects of nuclear waste management 
In the first half of the 90s about 90 000m3 of conditioned 
nuclear waste will be produced per year in the EC, the 
volume increasing over time. Of this volume of waste, 
67 000 m3 will be of low activity, 17 000 m3 of medium 
activity, 4 600 m3 will be alpha waste and about 400 
m3 will be of high activity. Account must also be taken 
of the waste resulting from the dismantling of plant. 
(By the year 2000 fifty nuclear power stations will have 
been decommissioned in the Community alone.) 
Certain kinds of waste will have to be stored for several 
thousand years, so that retrievability must be ensured 
in the initial experimental phase. 
The research/medicine sector accounts for less than 
10% of nuclear waste. 
There are diverging views in the Community on the 
future of nuclear energy. However, there is no doubt 
that—regardless of what decisions are made—the waste 
has to be disposed of. Any political control here will have to be based on a broad energy policy consensus. 
This will involve not only the partial solution of nuclear 
energy problems, but also comprehensive efforts to 
promote renewable, environmentally benign energy 
sources. Decisions here must not be influenced solely 
by cost considerations. 
4. The research programme to date 
The research programme ending this year has laid a 
worthwhile foundation for preparations for the exten­
sive disposal of radioactive waste. 
The outline of the work to date given in the Com­
mission document is convincing and provides a good 
general picture of the research objectives. 
The experts were able to give clear recommendations 
for the new programme on the basis of the results so 
far. 
5. Comments on the programme 
The programme has significant technical elements 
geared to waste management, such as: 
— construction and/or operation of underground 
facilities, 
— characterization of waste forms, 
— quality control of waste packages. 
The Committee would point out that everything must 
be done to achieve the necessary political consensus on 
the question of nuclear waste management. 
In the Committee's view, the results of research can 
be translated into safe, long-term waste management 
facilities only if—in addition to the technical prerequisi­
tes—the public is informed and convinced that the 
waste management plan is sound and necessary. An 
open public debate on this subject at all levels must 
therefore be promoted. 
In contrast to the diverging views on the further devel­
opment of nuclear energy, a broad consensus is essential 
on radioactive waste management. Any further delay 
in finding solutions for the safe, long-term disposal of 
nuclear waste can no longer be justified, inter alia vis­
a-vis the coming generations, towards whom we have 
a great responsibility. Close cooperation in this area 
and a permanent exchange of experience is essential 
both within the Community and with third countries. 
30. 12. 89 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 329/25 
The Committee would, however, draw the attention of 
the Commission and the Member States to the fact that 
waste management in the 'civil' sector alone will not 
solve the problem of radioactive waste. The same 
degree of effort must therefore be devoted to ensuring 
that waste is managed with the highest level of safety 
in the military sector, too, both inside and outside the 
Community. 
In the Committee's view, attention should be paid in 
this research programme to the following points, in 
addition to the suggestions already made above: 
— The Commission should make special efforts to 
ensure international harmonization concerning final 
disposal. 
— The research and development (R & D) activities 
in part B of the programme should be intensified so 
Done at Brussels, 18 October 1989. that final repositories can be brought into operation 
soon. 
Serious incidents during the transportation of waste 
and the monitoring of the disposal of radioactive 
waste have caused great public concern. The Com­
mission should help to ensure that the results and 
the extensive knowledge arising out of the R & D 
programme are put into practice as soon as possible, 
so that the safe chain of radioactive waste-manage­
ment operations cannot be broken by unscrupulous 
practices. 
The consolidation of the nuclear energy sector in 
the medium term must be backed up by appropriate 
Community programmes for the use of renewable 
energy sources. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Alberto MASPRONE 
Opinion on: 
— the proposal for a Council Directive on the right of residence for students, 
— the proposal for a Council Directive on the right of residence for employees and self-
employed persons who have ceased their occupational activity, and 
— the proposal for a Council Directive on the right of residence^) 
(89/C 329/10) 
On 5 July 1989 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under 
Articles 7, 49, 54 and 100 of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, 
on the abovementioned proposals. 
The Section for Social, Family, Educational and Cultural Affairs, which was responsible for 
preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its Opinion on 12 October 1989. 
The Rapporteur was Mr Pearson. 
At its 270th plenary session (meeting of 18 October 1989) the Economic and Social Committee 
adopted the following Opinion unanimously. 
1. General comments 
1.1. The Committee is of the view that one compre­
hensive Directive concerning the right of residence of 
all Community citizens would have been much more 
appropriate than one catering for workers and the 
three draft Directives involved in the document under 
(') OJ No C 191, 28. 7. 1989, pp. 2, 3 and 5. consideration. Whilst appreciative of the Commission's 
aim that those categories not covered by the draft 
Directive of the rights of residence of workers should 
likewise receive equal treatment, the Committee fore­
sees difficulty in the practical application unless the 
suggestions below are implemented. Despite these reser­
vations the Committee approves the intent of the pro­
posals and urges that these Directives be accepted as a 
single package and adopted at an early date.