WRITTEN QUESTION E-2027/03 by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Exemptions to avoid the hazardous storage of radioactive waste in porous ground with no possibility of cooling or retrieval.
Date: 2003-06-18
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Netherlands, derogation from EU law, environmental law, radioactive waste, storage of waste, underground storage of waste

C 58 E/124

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

6.3.2004

(2004/C 58 E/140)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2027/03

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(18 June 2003)

Subject: Exemptions to avoid the hazardous storage of radioactive waste in porous ground with no

possibility of cooling or retrieval

Is the Commission planning to issue a directive requiring all present and future EU Member States to

1.
store underground as from 2018 all the radioactive waste so far produced?

Is the Commission aware that there are major differences in the subsoil of EU Member States, which
2.
ranges from hard volcanic rock and flexible salt strata through porous limestone and clay to loose coarse-
grained sediment (sand) and material from dead plants and trees built up over the centuries (peat), which
means that the options for storing waste underground also vary significantly?

3. What view does the Commission take of the opinion of experts that the waste should always be kept
cool and that it should be retrievable at any time, if it emerges that this is necessary or that underground
storage can have unexpected negative effects on groundwater, the usability of the ground above storage
sites, soil temperature, etc?

Is the Commission taking account the fact that much of the substratum in the Netherlands consists
following discussions during the 1980s the

4.
of sand saturated with water, clay and peat and that
underground storage option was ruled out, not least because of the nature of the subsoil?

5.
Is the Commission aware that in the Netherlands EUR 110 million has been spent since 1993 on
storing all the radioactive waste from nuclear power stations, industry, hospitals and research institutes for
at least one hundred years at Borsele in COVRA, a concrete bunker to be completed by the end of 2003
with very thick walls capable of withstanding flooding and aircraft crashes, and that the first consignments
have now been transported to the site amid considerable public controversy?

6. What exemptions can the Commission offer the Netherlands (cid:1) and other Member States that find
themselves in a similar position (cid:1) from its planned underground storage requirements?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(17 July 2003)

1.
The Commission has adopted a proposal for a Council Directive on the management of spent
nuclear fuel and radioactive waste (1). The aim of this Directive is to establish long-term management
programmes for this material oriented towards disposal whenever possible. Where there is no suitable
alternative to disposal the Directive would require geological disposal sites to be available by 2018 for the
disposal, of the most hazardous categories of radioactive waste. Waste management programmes may,
under very strict conditions, include shipments of waste to another Member State or third country in full
compliance with existing norms and in agreement with the receiving State. This could facilitate the
development of common disposal facilities through co-operation between different States.

The PAGIS (2) study conducted within the Community Research Framework Programme showed the
2.
widespread availability of suitable host rock formations throughout the Union. These are specifically clay,
salt and crystalline rock strata or deposits.

3.
Heat generation is an important characteristic of high-level waste and this must be taken into
consideration in the design and operation of disposal systems, especially as regards maximum permissible
generation rates commensurate with adequate safety and negligible impact on host rock characteristics.

6.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 58 E/125

Major research projects are currently underway to assess these impacts. Retrievability of the waste is a
natural result of the ‘concentrate and contain’ strategy employed in radioactive waste management. What is
crucial is that any measures to enhance retrievability do not compromise overall safety.

The Commission places the highest priority on safety, and disposal is the only option capable of
4.
guaranteeing long-term safety and protection of the environment. Individual differences between Member
States were not specifically addressed in the current proposals, but the Commission considers there is
adequate flexibility in its measures to allow all Member States to find appropriate solutions. With regards
to the Dutch sub-soil, the PAGIS study mentioned above indicated the existence of suitable salt deposits.

5.

Yes.

6.
The Commission considers that the current proposals already offer significant flexibility to allow for
differences between Member States. The Commission has made it clear that it is ready to continue the
discussions on its proposals with the Member States in the Council to see if such flexibility might be
further enhanced.

(1) COM(2003) 32 final.
(2) Performance assessment of geological isolation systems.

(2004/C 58 E/141)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2036/03

by Chris Davies (ELDR) to the Commission

(18 June 2003)

Subject: Treaty on Austrian accession to the EU

According to the Austrian Embassy, under the 1995 Treaty on Austrian accession to the EU Austria
received two guarantees from the Commission:

1.

2.

in order to improve air pollution, emissions would be reduced permanently by 60 %, and

a European framework guaranteeing a sustainable transport policy governing traffic for all of Europe
would be in place by the time that the agreement expired.

When does the Commission intend to put forward proposals for such legislation?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(16 July 2003)

When Austria joined the Union, the Council asked the Commission to propose the adoption of a
framework aimed at resolving the environmental problems caused by heavy good vehicles (see Declaration
34 annexed to the Adhesion Act of Austria).

With a view to implementing this framework, the Commission presented a working document (1) and
proposals, inter alia, in the area of road charging and railway policy.

As far as road charging is concerned, a proposal for a Directive on the charging of heavy goods vehicles
for the use of certain infrastructures (2) was put forward, which became the so-called ‘Eurovignette-
Directive’ (3). This proposal contained amongst other things the possibility for Member States to apply
higher rates in sensitive areas. This and other novel aspects of the proposal were, however, not adopted by
the Community legislator.

As far as railway policy is concerned, the Commission presented in the late 1990s the first railway
package, which was adopted in 2001 and presented a second railway package in 2002, which is now
being debated in the Council and Parliament.