WRITTEN QUESTION E-4051/03 by Hiltrud Breyer (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Export of nuclear facilities to the People's Republic of China.
Date: 2004-01-12
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: China, International Atomic Energy Agency, dual-use technology, export monitoring, export restriction, nuclear non-proliferation, nuclear power station, radioactive waste, waste recycling

8.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88 E/667

1.

Can the Commission state the overall cost of the project?

Can the Commission provide details of the project’s funding and the amounts contributed by

2.
individual financial backers?

Through which projects and how substantially is the European Union committed to financing the

3.
processing of nuclear waste in third countries?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(24 February 2004)

The Member of the Commission responsible for External Relations laid the foundation stone of the
1.
Industrial Complex for Solid Radioactive Waste Management (ICSRM). The ICSRM is a part of the complex
which is being built in Chernobyl to address the important issue of radioactive waste. The overall budget
for the ICSRM is EUR 44 million. Other installations, funded by the Nuclear Safety Account, managed by
EBRD, are the Liquid Radwaste Treatment Plant (LRTP (cid:1) EUR 25,7 million) and the plant to handle and
store the spent fuel (ISF (cid:1) EUR 95,3 million).

2.
The budget of the ICSRM is provided by the EU TACIS Nuclear Safety Programme (EUR 41,3 million)
and Ukrainian Government (EUR 2,7 million). Additionally an on-site coordination unit is being financed
to pursue project management, with an amount of EUR 4,25 million until July 2004 and a likely extension
(EUR 3,5 million) up to the completion of the ICSRM.

3.
The Commission follows the strategy laid out in the TACIS Regulation 99/2000, which states, as one
of the priorities, the improvement of nuclear safety by ‘supporting the development and implementation of
spent fuel, and decommissioning and nuclear waste management strategies, including in North West Russia
in the context of wider international co-operation’.

Besides the projects mentioned under point 1 for Chernobyl, the TACIS Program is funding projects to
tackle the issue of nuclear waste in North West Russia.

For instance, the Commission is:

(cid:1) taking part in the Northern Dimension Environmental Fund (NDEP), managed by the European Bank
for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), to which the TACIS programme contributes with
EUR 40 million and,

(cid:1) funding projects like the ‘Lepse’ Project to take care of spent nuclear fuel from ice-breakers, which is
stored aboard this ship. Some preliminary works (about EUR 2 million) were carried out in 1998-
1999. Further support is foreseen for the completion of the works regarding defuelling.

In Kazakhstan, the TACIS Program is to carry out a project in two steps to remedy the nuclear waste
problems of the Semipalatinsk nuclear test site, resulting from more than 460 nuclear weapons tests that
took place during the period 1949-1989. For this project, EUR 1 million is allocated in the Annual
Programme 2003. Furthermore, up to EUR 4 million are foreseen in the 2004-2006 Multiannual Indicative
Programme.

(2004/C 88 E/0686)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-4051/03

by Hiltrud Breyer (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(12 January 2004)

Subject: Export of nuclear facilities to the People’s Republic of China

The plutonium contained in fuel rods used in civilian nuclear reactors in China cannot be used for MOX
production because no reprocessing plant is available. Military stocks of plutonium are not sufficient to
run the MOX factory economically. It is also doubtful whether existing nuclear reactors can operate with
MOX fuel rods. Leading experts consider it possible that the plant can be converted to process weapons-
grade plutonium.

C 88 E/668

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

8.4.2004

The IAEA takes the view that it has no legal power to guarantee the effective monitoring of imported
nuclear facilities, and that it does not have the necessary resources in terms of staff and funds.

1. What information does the Commission have on the purpose for which the Hanau nuclear fuel rod
factory, the SNR-300 and its reactor core are to be used in China?

Does the Commission consider it possible that the plant, components and nuclear fuel to be supplied

2.
as part of this deal could be used for military purposes, directly or indirectly?

How does the Commission currently assess the compatibility of the export plans with Council
3.
Regulation (EC) No 1334/2000 (1),
in force against China and other
the EU arms embargo still
international commitments on preventing the proliferation of goods which can be used for military
purposes?

4.
Does the Commission share the IAEA’s view that it is not possible to monitor military use of the
plant effectively, and what conclusions does it draw for the application of the arms embargo against
China?

(1) OJ L 159, 30.6.2000, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(24 February 2004)

The Commission is aware of the possible export by Germany of a Mox Fuel Fabrication Plant to China. It
is also aware that China expressed a wish to acquire SNR 300 fuel elements. However, the Commission
has no official information as to why China is interested in this material and equipment. In fact, the MOX
fabrication process is not designed to contribute to the production of a nuclear weapon but rather
represents an important step to reduce Plutonium via its consumption in nuclear Light Water Reactors.

The export in question is covered by Council Regulation (EC) No1334/2000 of 22 June 2000 setting up a
Community regime for the control of exports of Dual-Use items and technology, hereafter ‘Dual-Use
Regulation’, and is therefore subject to a license requirement. The item is listed in Annex I (0B005). The
relevant provisions here are Articles 3 and 8 of the Dual-Use Regulation.

Under Article 3(1) of the Dual-Use Regulation, an authorisation is required for all goods listed in Annex I.
The Commission believes that the MOX plant mentioned in the question technically corresponds to the
item listed under 0B005 of Annex I of the Dual-Use Regulation. Consequently, an authorisation would be
required under Article 3(1).

According to the information available to the Commission, the German licensing authority received an
inquiry from the German company Siemens, as to whether a license for an export of the factory to China
would be granted. To the best of the Commission’s knowledge, a decision has not yet been issued.
However, the decision to grant or refuse such a license is a sovereign one. The Regulation only lists in its
Article 8, in a non comprehensive manner, certain issues that must be considered by the Member States in
making the decision. The Commission has no authority to intervene. Only once the decision has been
taken, could other Member States eventually question such a decision but the conditions for such action
are strictly defined by the Regulation.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is the responsible authority to monitor nuclear facilities
and the Commission has not been informed of the IAEA declaration. However, China is one of the five
nuclear weapon States defined by the Non Proliferation Treaty. The IAEA can therefore only perform
checks on a two-sided voluntary basis. In addition, the cost/benefit effectiveness of such checks would have
to be evaluated. Furthermore, the Commission would like to point out that China is a member of the
Zangger Committee, which is a Committee to control the export of nuclear material.

8.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88 E/669

Regarding the EU arms embargo on China, the European Council of 12 December 2003 invited the
General Affairs Council to re-examine the question. A first discussion took place at the January 2004
General Affairs Council. Work in the relevant Council groups is ongoing and a decision is not expected
before March 2004.

(2004/C 88 E/0687)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-4058/03

by Elspeth Attwooll (ELDR) to the Commission

(13 January 2004)

Subject: Gun laws in Turkey

In the first five months of 2003, 1094 people were killed and 10 513 were injured by guns in Turkey. On
7 July 2003, two-and-a-half-year-old Alistair Grimason was shot by a stray bullet while sleeping in a
pushchair in a café. The Turkish Government has since made moves to tighten its laws on firearms crime.

Is the Commission aware of these statistics, and can it confirm whether it will consider matters such as the
prevalence of firearms and the legislation on firearm possession and gun crimes, when considering the
application of countries for EU membership?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(20 February 2004)

The Commission is aware of the disturbing facts mentioned by the Honourable Member and shares her
concern regarding the number of gun-related deaths and injuries in Turkey.

The question of firearms control
is not covered specifically by the Copenhagen political criteria. All
Candidate Countries are required to accede to the 2000 United Nations (UN) Convention against
Transnational Organised Crime (the Palermo Convention) and its Protocols. Turkey has acceded to the
Convention and signed on 28 June 2002 the Protocol against the Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking
in Firearms, their Parts and Components and Ammunition. Turkey has not yet ratified this Protocol. The
Commission will continue to monitor progress on this issue.

(2004/C 88 E/0688)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-4077/03

by Chris Davies (ELDR) to the Commission

(14 January 2004)

Subject: NGOs

What requirements does the Commission insist upon in order for an organisation to be recognised as an
NGO of sufficient legitimacy for it to be granted EU funding to assist with humanitarian relief in particular
circumstances?

Answer given by Mr Nielson on behalf of the Commission

(3 March 2004)

Funding to non-governmental organisations (NGOs) called upon to provide relief assistance in natural or
man-made humanitarian crises is granted by the Commission through its Humanitarian Aid Office (ECHO).