Legislative resolution embodying Parliament's opinion on the proposal for a Council Decision adapting for the second time Decision 94/268/Euratom concerning the framework programme of activities in the field of research and training for the European Atomic Energy Community (1994-98), as adapted by Decision 96/.../Euratom (COM(96)0012 - C4- 0157/96 - 96/0035(CNS)) (Consultation procedure)
Date: 1996-06-18
Institutions: Committee on Industry, Research and Energy, European Parliament
Subjects: EU research policy, research and development, research programme, technological change













EUR-Lex - 51996AP0183(01) - EN






Avis juridique important




|



51996AP0183(01)

Legislative resolution embodying Parliament's opinion on the proposal for a Council Decision adapting for the second time Decision 94/268/Euratom concerning the framework programme of activities in the field of research and training for the European Atomic Energy Community (1994-98), as adapted by Decision 96/.../Euratom (COM(96)0012 - C4- 0157/96 - 96/0035(CNS)) (Consultation procedure)  


Official Journal C 198 , 08/07/1996 P. 0040 





Proposal for a Council Decision adapting for the second time Decision 94/268/Euratom concerning the framework programme of activities in the field of research and training for the European Atomic Energy Community (1994-98), as adapted by Decision 96/.../Euratom (COM(96)0012 - C4-0157/96 - 96/0035(CNS))The proposal was approved with the following amendments:(Amendment 42)Recital 1a (new)>Text following EP vote>Whereas the Community can play a role in promoting cooperation and coordination of the wealth of scientific expertise to be found in all Member States;(Amendment 43)Recital 3>Original text>Whereas it is necessary that the Community continues to play an important international role in the field of nuclear safety; whereas it has special responsibility for enhancing the safety of nuclear plants throughout the continent of Europe; whereas constructors and operators in the Union must take safety requirements into account; whereas the competitiveness depends on the research and technological development work carried out in this field;>Text following EP vote>Whereas it is necessary that the Community continues to play an important international role in the field of nuclear safety; whereas it has special responsibility for enhancing the safety of nuclear plants throughout the continent of Europe; whereas constructors and operators in the Union must take safety requirements into account with due regard for competitiveness; whereas the competitiveness depends on the research and technological development work carried out in this field;(Amendment 44)SOLE ARTICLE (1)Article 1(3) (Decision 94/268/Euratom)>Original text>Without prejudice to Article 7(3) of the Treaty, the amount deemed necessary for Community participation in this framework programme shall be ECU 1441 million.>Text following EP vote>Without prejudice to Article 7(3) of the Treaty, the amount deemed necessary for Community participation in this framework programme shall be ECU 1431 million.(Amendment 45)ANNEX I>Original text>ECU millioncurrent pricesNuclear fission safety 546Controlled thermonuclear fusion 895Amount deemed necessary 1441>Text following EP vote>ECU millioncurrent pricesNuclear fission safety 536Controlled thermonuclear fusion 895Amount deemed necessary 1431(Amendment 46)ANNEX II, INTRODUCTION, 2ND PARAGRAPH>Original text>Citizens all over the continent of Europe are highly concerned about nuclear fission safety and expect more stringent standards and safety practices to be established. European constructors and industrial operators must take account of these requirements at a time of mounting competition worldwide. Safety is also a crucial issue in the Union's relations with the Central and Eastern European countries and the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS). In order to step up the pace of research, to ensure closer cooperation throughout Europe and to reduce the delays in take-up and dissemination of the results, the framework programme must be reinforced.>Text following EP vote>Citizens all over the continent of Europe are highly concerned about nuclear fission safety and expect more stringent standards and safety practices to be established. European constructors and industrial operators must take account of these requirements at a time of mounting competition worldwide. The PHARE and TACIS programmes already include assistance to deal with safety in the Central and Eastern European countries and the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS). In order to step up the pace of research, to ensure closer cooperation throughout Europe and to reduce the delays in take-up and dissemination of the results, the framework programme must be reinforced.(Amendment 47)ANNEX II (1)>Original text>1. Reinforcement of the work on the following topics:>Text following EP vote>1. Reinforcement of the work on the following topics:>Text following EP vote>- development of new technologies and designs for the safe long-term storage of radioactive wastes,>Original text>- use of innovatory approaches taking account of the safety of the new generation of reactors, beyond the projects under development. This includes topics concerning both the reactor itself and the fuel (new absorbers, very advanced fuel, etc.),>Text following EP vote>- use of innovatory approaches taking account of the safety of the new generation of reactors, beyond the projects under development. This includes topics concerning both the reactor itself and the fuel (new absorbers, very advanced fuel, etc.),>Original text>- reactor safety will not be limited to in-depth study of accidents. It also includes accident prevention (such as systems analysis and passive actuators),>Text following EP vote>- reactor safety will not be limited to in-depth study of accidents. It also includes accident prevention (such as systems analysis and passive actuators),>Original text>- phenomena concerning the fuel cycle and management and storage of wastes, which remain a major issue, partly because of the non-proliferation imperatives (plutonium) and partly from the point of view of energy efficiency of the fuel (burn-up).>Text following EP vote>- phenomena concerning the management and storage of wastes, which remain a major issue, partly because of the non-proliferation imperatives (plutonium) and partly from the point of view of energy efficiency of the fuel (burn- up).>Text following EP vote>- scientific cooperation in coping with the delayed effects of nuclear accidents, particularly in the medical sphere.>Text following EP vote>- Research in radiation protection will focus on the early events of radiation carcinogenesis and on the epidemiological follow-up of cancer induction as a consequence of acute or chronic exposure. The latter will be conceived in the framework of broad international cooperation and will consider the Hiroshima/Nagasaki population, the people of Altai, the Chernobyl liquidators, the people living on the banks of the Techa river (Russia) and the nuclear workers.(Amendment 62)ANNEX II (2), 6TH PARAGRAPH>Original text>The research in the field of safety has always had quantifiable objectives (minimising the risk of a major accident, limiting exposure to specified dosage) allowing the progress achieved to be measured. The new activities proposed herein are set, among others, in the perspective of reducing the risks of a severe accident by a factor of 10 (new generation of power stations).>Text following EP vote>The research in the field of safety has always had quantifiable objectives (minimising the risk of a major accident, limiting exposure to specified dosage) allowing the progress achieved to be measured.(Amendment 48)ANNEX II (2a) (new)>Text following EP vote>2a. The Commission will set up a working group 'Energy¨ to formulate a concept for the organization and accomplishment of the decommissioning and demolition of inefficient nuclear power stations in Central and Eastern Europe and the countries of the CIS in cooperation with these countries. In this context, the establishment of a research and study centre on the site of the former Greifswald nuclear power station in Germany will be considered and, if appropriate, initiated. These measures will also include the 'sarcophagus' project at Chernobyl. The Commission will advocate the establishment of a research centre on the site of the Chernobyl nuclear power station in cooperation with Russia and Ukraine to ensure the safety of the 'sarcophagus' and its eventual removal. In Ukraine, especially in Chernobyl, R& D projects aiming at greater use of non-nuclear energies, in particular renewable energies, should be supported.Legislative resolution embodying Parliament's opinion on the proposal for a Council Decision adapting for the second time Decision 94/268/Euratom concerning the framework programme of activities in the field of research and training for the European Atomic Energy Community (1994-98), as adapted by Decision 96/.../Euratom (COM(96)0012 - C4-0157/96 - 96/0035(CNS))(Consultation procedure)The European Parliament,- having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council, COM(96)0012 - 96/0035(CNS) ((OJ C 115, 19.4.1996, p. 13.)),- having been consulted by the Council pursuant to Article 7 of the Euratom Treaty,- having regard to Rule 58 of its Rules of Procedure,- having regard to the report of the Committee on Research, Technological Development and Energy and the opinions of the Committee on Budgets, the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs and Industrial Policy, the Committee on Transport and Tourism, the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Protection and the Committee on Culture, Youth, Education and the Media (A4-0183/96),1. Approves the Commission proposal, subject to Parliament's amendments;2. Calls on the Commission to amend its proposal accordingly, pursuant to Article 119, second paragraph, of the Euratom Treaty;3. Calls on the Council to notify Parliament should it intend to depart from the text approved by Parliament4. Calls for the conciliation procedure to be opened should the Council intend to depart from the text approved by Parliament;5. Asks to be consulted again should the Council intend to make substantial modifications to the Commission proposal;6. Instructs its President to forward this opinion to the Council and Commission.