Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament - Decommissioning of Nuclear Installations and Management of Radioactive Waste: Management of Nuclear Liabilities arising out of the Activities of the Joint Research Centre (JRC) carried out under the Euratom Treaty
Date: 2009-01-12
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EAEC Treaty, Joint Research Centre, decommissioning of power stations, nuclear power station, radioactive waste, waste management

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 12.1.2009 
COM(2008)903 final 

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE 
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 

Decommissioning of Nuclear Installations and Management of Radioactive Waste: 
Management of Nuclear Liabilities arising out of the Activities of the Joint Research 
Centre (JRC) carried out under the Euratom Treaty  

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
 
 
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE 
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 

Decommissioning of Nuclear Installations and Management of Radioactive Waste: 
Management of Nuclear Liabilities arising out of the Activities of the Joint Research 
Centre (JRC) carried out under the Euratom Treaty  

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

4.1. 

4.2. 

4.3. 

4.4. 

5. 

Executive Summary ..................................................................................................... 4 

Purpose of the Communication.................................................................................... 5 

Context ......................................................................................................................... 5 

Achievements of the Decommissioning Programme (2004 – 2008) ........................... 5 

Ispra (IT) ...................................................................................................................... 6 

Karlsruhe (DE) ............................................................................................................. 7 

Geel (BE) ..................................................................................................................... 7 

Petten (NL)................................................................................................................... 7 

Overall Evaluation of the Programme (2008).............................................................. 8 

5.1. 

Status of the Programme at Ispra ................................................................................. 8 

5.1.1.  External Review ........................................................................................................... 8 

5.1.2.  Risk Management ........................................................................................................ 8 

5.1.3. 

Impact on the Budget ................................................................................................. 11 

5.2. 

Status of the Programme at Karlsruhe, Geel and Petten ............................................ 12 

5.2.1.  Karlsruhe (DE) ........................................................................................................... 12 

5.2.2.  Geel (BE) ................................................................................................................... 13 

5.2.3.  Petten (NL)................................................................................................................. 13 

6. 

7. 

8. 

9. 

Programme Status and Budget as of April 2008 (Summary)..................................... 13 

Financial Impact......................................................................................................... 14 

Opinion of the Group of Independent Experts........................................................... 14 

Opinion of the JRC's Board of Governors ................................................................. 15 

10. 

Conclusions ................................................................................................................ 15 

ANNEX 1: Costs and Schedule of the Programme.................................................................. 17 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
1. 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

The  purpose  of  this  Communication  is  to  provide  an  update  on  the  development  of  the 
programme  for  the  decommissioning  of  obsolete  nuclear  installations  and  nuclear  waste 
management  (D&WM  programme)  managed  by  the  Joint  Research  Centre  (JRC)  of  the 
European Commission, covering the period 2004 – 2008. The activities of the programme are 
most  significant  on  the  JRC-Ispra  site  in  Italy,  host  to  most  of  the  shutdown  nuclear 
installations of the JRC, whilst decommissioning activities are, for the time being, relatively 
limited at the sites at Geel (Belgium), Karlsruhe (Germany) and Petten (The Netherlands), all 
of them still operating their nuclear installations. 

In the last four years, the programme has gained momentum and achieved solid progress in a 
number of key programme activities. At Ispra, in the absence of radioactive waste treatment 
and  storage  facilities  in  Italy,  JRC-Ispra  has  focussed  on  designing  and  building  waste 
characterisation,  treatment  and  conditioning  installations  at  its  site  (pre-decommissioning). 
The total waste at Ispra (12 000 m3), once conditioned, will have to be stored on-site for as 
long as there are no interim or final deposits in Italy; to this effect, JRC is designing an on-site 
interim  storage  facility.  Much  of  the  nuclear  material  has  been  shipped  off-site  or  is  in  the 
process  of  being  transferred  to  third  parties.  Meanwhile,  pre-decommissioning  activities 
continued  at  the  three  other  sites,  aimed  at  obsolete  facilities  and  equipment  resulting  from 
past research work, and the removal off-site of fuels and nuclear materials. 

Both  internal  and  external  evaluations  conducted  in  2008  endorsed  the  local  strategies 
adopted  for  the  execution  of  the  D&WM  programme  and  recognised  the  progress  that  has 
been  made  at  the  sites.  However,  there  are  some  severe  constraints  and  uncertainties 
associated with the execution of the programme in Ispra, notably: 

– 

– 

– 

– 

Absence  of  definitive  Italian  standards  governing  the  storage  of  waste  ("waste 
acceptance criteria") that leads the JRC to postpone the conditioning of some waste.  

Uncertainty concerning the cost of final disposal of waste in a future Italian storage 
site.  This  represents  a  potential  significant  financial  risk  for  the  Community  for 
which the JRC is preparing contingency plans. 

Low limiting Italian value for public exposure that impose additional constraints on 
the management and interim storage of waste with subsequent cost implications. 

Existence of 'Italian liabilities' at the Ispra site, resulting from former Italian nuclear 
operations  at  the  Ispra  site,  which  increases  the  workload  of  the  JRC  and  entails  a 
financial risk for the Community. 

In  addition  to  these  constraints,  the  limited  number  of  local  nuclear-qualified  contractors  as 
well  as  the  Commission's  internal  procurement  and  staffing  procedures,  which  sometimes 
prove  to  be  restrictive  given  the  technically  complex  nature  of  the  programme,  have 
contributed to the delay of certain projects in Ispra. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
 
The combined effects of external and internal factors, such as procurement procedures, have 
slowed  some  key  activities  of  the  Ispra  programme,  and  added  to  the  predicted  cost  (+6%) 
and timescale of the programme (+8 years for delivery to a national final storage centre). To 
deal  with  the  increased  uncertainty  JRC  has  adopted  a  risk  mitigation  strategy.  The  actions 
foreseen  include  enhanced  contacts  with  the  Italian  stakeholders,  more  reliance  on  turnkey 
contracts and streamlining of procurement channels. In terms of contingency planning, if the 
uncertainty  concerning  the  waste  acceptance  criteria  persists,  JRC  will  have  to  refocus  the 
Ispra  programme  on  safe  conservation,  and  postpone  the  conditioning  of  waste  until  a  final 
disposal option is secured. 

JRC  has  discussed  extensively  its  decommissioning  strategy  involving  industry  experts  and 
the  Group  of  Independent  Experts  advising  JRC  on  the  programme,  all  of  which  have 
contributed to and endorsed the strategic choices made. 

2. 

PURPOSE OF THE COMMUNICATION 

The  purpose  of  this  Communication  is  to  update  the  information  supplied  to  the  European 
Parliament and the Council on the development of the programme for the decommissioning of 
obsolete nuclear installations and nuclear waste management (D&WM programme1) managed 
by  the  Joint  Research  Centre  (JRC)  of  the  European  Commission.  It  follows  on  from  the 
communications issued in 1999 COM(1999)114 and in 2004 SEC(2004)621. 

3. 

CONTEXT  

Established  by  Article  8  of  the  Euratom  Treaty  and  originally  entirely  dedicated  to  nuclear 
energy,  the  JRC  subsequently  diversified  its  activities  to  meet  the  needs  of  the  other 
Directorates-General  of  the  Commission  and  other  Institutions.  Nuclear  activities  currently 
make up 30% of the activities of the JRC. On the basis of the Treaty the JRC has to manage 
its nuclear liabilities and decommission its installations once they have been definitively shut 
down.  To  this  end,  a  budget  heading  has  been  created  in  agreement  with  the  European 
Parliament and the Council. 

The  D&WM  Programme  relates  to  all  JRC  nuclear  installations,  even  if  many  of  them 
continue to be in operation, in particular in Geel, Karlsruhe and Petten. The shutdown nuclear 
installations are predominantly in Ispra. In practical terms the Commission has undertaken to 
decommission  obsolete  installations  up  to  the  total  and  unconditional  release  of  the 
installations;  i.e.  without  any  radiological  restrictions.  This  will  allow  the  installations  to  be 
used for non-nuclear purposes. 

4. 

ACHIEVEMENTS OF THE DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME (2004 – 2008) 

As  explained  above,  the  Geel,  Karlsruhe  and  Petten  sites  carry  out  R&D  activities  in  the 
nuclear field, whereas at Ispra, with the exception of the Cyclotron and the laboratories used 
to support the JRC Safeguards programme, all the installations (reactors and hot laboratories) 
have been definitively shut down for a number of years. The Decommissioning Programme is 

1 

D&WM: Decommissioning and Waste Management 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                 
therefore more advanced at Ispra and hence this Section has more detail on Ispra than on the 
other sites. 

4.1. 

Ispra (IT) 

The situation in Italy is different from that in the other JRC host countries in that there is no 
service provider for the treatment of radioactive waste in Italy, nor a national repository either 
for interim or final storage of the waste. For this reason JRC-Ispra must build several waste 
treatment and  conditioning  installations  at its Ispra site. In accordance with Italian law, this 
waste  must  be  capable  of  being  put  in  interim  storage  for  a  period  which  is  still  to  be 
determined, but which may be as long as 50 years. 

The definition of the Ispra Programme has taken this particular requirement into account and 
the JRC has adopted its strategy accordingly. 

The Ispra Programme has five main objectives, to be carried out in the following order: 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

keeping obsolete installations safe in accordance with the safety standards in force, 
operations which are known as 'safe conservation'2; 

constructing or refurbishment of waste characterisation, treatment, conditioning and 
interim storage installations; 

conditioning nuclear materials with a view to their storage on-site or their transfer to 
third parties; 

recovering, treating and reconditioning existing waste; 

decommissioning obsolete installations and managing resulting waste. 

The main focus of the Programme since 2004 has been to create waste characterisation and 
treatment installations. At the end of 2007, the following installations were completed: 

– 

– 

– 

– 

the Liquid Waste Treatment plant; 

the plant for decontaminating solid waste by abrasive blasting; 

the  solid  waste  physical  and  radiological  characterisation  installation  allowing  the 
contents and the radiological composition of the waste drums to be monitored; 

the  monitoring  installation  for  waste  which  is  very  slightly  radioactive  or  non-
radioactive, which can be recycled using traditional industrial distribution channels; 

In  addition,  the  following  operations  have  been  carried  out  or  are  in  the  process  of  being 
completed: 

– 

20 tonnes of unirradiated fuel have been sent to the United States and France; 

2 

This means to maintain shut-down installations in a safe and secure condition, to respond to the ageing 
of installations or changes in national and international safety rules; it precedes the decommissioning of 
the installations.  

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
                                                 
– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

1 500 radioactive sources which were withdrawn from service are in the process of 
being transferred to a third party; 

alkaline metals are in the process of being removed; 

modification  and  refurbishment  of  hot  cells  is  under  way  to  enable  the  irradiated 
nuclear materials which are still present at the site to be conditioned. 

physical  and  radiological  characterisation  of  the  six  main  obsolete  installations 
(reactors and hot laboratories) is under way. 

other  operations  have  been  carried  out  for  maintenance  purposes  or  to  meet  new 
regulatory requirements. 

Some pre-decommissioning activities have been carried out, including the demolition of the 
cooling tower of the Ispra-1 reactor, the pipeline taking liquid waste to the former treatment 
plant,  demolition  of  several  secondary  buildings,  the  removal  of  equipment  and  the 
preparation of more than 1200 tonnes of metals and other materials for evacuation. 

Finally, the waste treatment and interim storage area has been restructured and refurbished to 
accommodate  the  new  installations.  An  interim  storage  building  for  up  to  12  000  m3  of 
conditioned  waste,  corresponding  to  the  total  estimated  waste  at  Ispra,  is  in  the  process  of 
being designed. 

4.2. 

Karlsruhe (DE) 

Unlike  Ispra,  JRC-Karlsruhe  is  able  to  remove  most  of  its  radioactive  waste  to  an  interim 
storage  managed  by  the  research  centre  Forschungszentrum  Karlsruhe  GmbH,  which  is 
responsible for collecting, treating and conditioning of radioactive waste in the region with a 
view to its final disposal at a future national centre. 

Since  2004,  JRC-Karlsruhe  has  succeeded  in  the  removal  of  waste  accumulated  from  past 
research  work  and  decommissions  equipment  which  has  become  obsolete,  such  as  glove 
boxes  used  to  handle  hazardous  materials.  On  average,  twenty  glove  boxes  have  been 
decommissioned every year. 

4.3. 

Geel (BE) 

In  2004,  JRC-Geel  finished  the  initial  phase  of  its  decommissioning  programme,  which 
consisted  of  the  clean-up  of  the  radiochemistry  laboratory.  Since  2004  the  site  has  also 
removed some unirradiated nuclear materials ahead of schedule. 

4.4. 

Petten (NL) 

In addition to carrying out research and development activities in non-nuclear energy fields, 
the Institute of Energy (IE) owns the High Flux Reactor (HFR) which is used for research on 
the safety of reactors: handling of fuel and components, safety of future reactors (Generation 
IV).  Since  2004  the  JRC  has  transferred  the  operating  licence  of  the  HFR  to  the  company 
NRG  (NL)  which  already  operated  the  reactor  under  a  JRC  licence.  This  has  enabled 
responsibilities  vis-à-vis  the  national  safety  authorities  to  be  clarified,  as  from  now  on  the 
operator and the licence holder are a single body. Nevertheless, the JRC will continue to own 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
the  HFR,  whilst 
decommissioning, are paid for by its end users. 

its  operating  costs, 

including  a  contribution 

towards 

its  final 

Since  2004  the  JRC-Petten  has  sent  back  to  the  United  States  a  batch  of  420  fuel  elements 
which  constituted  inherited  liabilities.  Furthermore,  in  2007  the  ownership  of  a  batch  of 
highly-irradiated historical materials was transferred to NRG. There were no other financial 
operations  under  the  programme  budget  and  no  other  action  is  planned  prior  to  the  final 
shutdown of the reactor which will not be before 2016. 

5. 

OVERALL EVALUATION OF THE PROGRAMME (2008) 

In early 2008, the JRC undertook to evaluate the decommissioning programme at its sites to 
verify  progress  in  the  implementation  of  the  D&WM  programme  between  2004  and  2008. 
The  result  of  the  evaluation  was  to  allow  the  JRC  to  re-adjust  the  programme  strategy  and 
associated cost and schedule. 

5.1. 

Status of the Programme at Ispra 

5.1.1.  External Review 

In  addition  to  its  internal  review,  JRC  asked  an  industrial  company  specialising  in  the 
management  of  nuclear  projects  and  decommissioning,  to  carry  out  a  review  of  the  Ispra 
programme. This review was carried out in the first half of 2008 with the aim to identify those 
elements of the current D&WM programme that control the overall risks to the programme in 
terms of cost and timescale. 

The review has provided an overall endorsement for the choice of decommissioning strategy 
and  technical  approach  to  the  D&WM  programme  at  Ispra.  The  chosen  strategy  is  deemed 
consistent  with  current  best  practice  in  decommissioning  that  favours  an  early  approach  to 
decommissioning  consistent  with  the  availability  waste  storage  or  disposal  facilities,  safety 
requirements, and budgetary constraints. 

However,  the  external  review  confirms  the  findings  of  the  internal  review  concerning  a 
number  of  constraints  and  difficulties  which  imply  significant  risks  and  cost/timescale 
uncertainties  for  the  programme  and  recommends  that  actions  are  taken  to  mitigate  these 
risks. These risks and uncertainties and a strategy for their mitigation are described below. 

5.1.2.  Risk Management 

In 2003 the D&WM programme of the JRC-Ispra was drawn up on the basis that a national 
storage  centre  for  radioactive  waste  would  open  in  2012.  As  a  result  of  doubts  about  the 
centre chosen in 2003, an Italian site is now expected to be opened in 2020 at the earliest, for 
final storage of category 2 waste (short-lived and low to medium activity), while a facility for 
only  interim  (not  final)  storage  of  category  3  waste  (long-lived  and  high  activity)  might 
become available on the same site. 

The  JRC-Ispra  programme  is  therefore  being  developed  within  a  national  context  which  is 
made  difficult  in  particular  in  view  of  the  absence  of  definitive  standards  governing  the 
storage  of  waste,  and  also  unduly  strict  national  regulations.  The  programme  is  further 
constrained by local market conditions and Commission internal rules. 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
The  constraints  on  the  development  of  the  programme,  and  the  action  taken  by  the  JRC  to 
mitigate them, can be summarised as follows: 

A: Absence of definitive  standards governing the storage of waste (or waste  'acceptance 
criteria' or WAC). This is mainly linked to the fact that a national repository for the disposal 
of radioactive waste has not yet been decided upon. Until these criteria are definitive, the risk 
for the JRC that the waste must be reconditioned later persists. The subsequent financial risk 
would be very high. 

– 

JRC action: To mitigate this risk, the JRC has intensified its contacts with the Italian 
authorities in view to obtaining their commitment regarding the waste that could be 
conditioned at Ispra accordingly to the provisional acceptance criteria for category 
2 waste3. An initial positive reaction has been received from the Italian Ministry. The 
Commission  continues  its  contacts  at  political  level  in  order  to  arrive  at  a  formal 
agreement on final storage and WACs. In the interim, the JRC modified the project 
of the waste interim storage building at Ispra, to receive only category 2 waste since 
no  WAC  exist  for  the  category  3  waste.  In  addition,  the  JRC  contemplates  to 
condition only category 2 waste that need to be retrieved for reasons of safety (e.g. 
bituminised drums) and wait until the issuing of final WAC or a formal commitment 
from  the  Italian  administration  for  conditioning  other  category  2  waste  and, 
essentially, category 3 waste. This re-orientation of the strategy heavily impacted on 
the  programme  since  the  design  of  the  interim  store  has  been  reviewed  to 
accommodate only category 2 waste and its opening is now foreseen in 2012 instead 
of  2009.  A  further  consequence  of  the  afore-mentioned  constraints  regards  the 
containerisation  of  waste 
the 
unavailability  of  waste  containers  compliant  with  new  Italian  regulations;  this  is 
causing the JRC to design its own (qualified) containers. 

interim  storage,  which 

is  hampered  by 

for 

B: Absence  of  thresholds for  the release of waste. In Italy  the principle of releasing  very 
slightly  radioactive  materials  is  allowed.  This  principle  allows  materials  which  do  not  pose 
any radiological risk for the population to be recycled. The release thresholds are granted on a 
case-by-case  basis  and  for  each  radionuclide  (in  any  case  the  maximum  value  is  fixed  at  1 
Bq/g and the actual value can range from 1 to the order of 0.1 Bq/g). The Ispra site received 
this authorisation in July 2008 limited to the waste and material already produced during the 
facilities operation. Therefore it is now possible to release this type of waste. 

– 

JRC action: The JRC shall require a similar authorisation once applications for the 
decommissioning  licence  of  each  facility  will  be  forwarded  to  the  competent 
authorities. 

C: Low limiting value for public exposure. In Italy the dose constraint for exposure of the 
public to ionising radiation from nuclear activities including decommissioning, treatment and 
interim storage of waste is the lowest of all the European countries (10 µSv/year, i.e. between 
15 and 100 times lower than the corresponding constraints set in other European countries), 
unless  a  special  derogation  is  granted  by  the  administrative  authorities.  It  is  also  low 

3 

Category 2 waste (medium-low radioactive waste, short period of life) represent 95% of the radioactive 
waste at Ispra. 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
                                                 
compared  to  the  proposals  found  in  the  2007  ICRP  recommendations4.  This  low  dose 
constraint places a serious restriction on the planned decommissioning operations. 

– 

JRC  action:  The  JRC  reinforced  the  interim  waste  storage  building  at  the  site  to 
lower  the  outside  radiation  exposure;  this  has  added  costs,  albeit  moderate,  to  the 
programme. In the future, the present dose constraint could cause problems for other 
decommissioning operations and lead to further costs. 

D: Existence of 'Italian liabilities' at the Ispra site. Some of the installations and historical 
waste  at  Ispra  belong  in  whole  or  in  part  to  Italian  bodies.5  These  installations  and  waste 
constitute the 'Italian liabilities', which are estimated at several tens of millions of €. The JRC 
has drawn  up its own  list  of  what constitutes the liabilities,  but  the list and its related costs 
have  not  yet  been  accepted  by  the  Italian  parties  involved.  The  absence  of  an  agreement 
between the parties concerned is affecting the implementation of the programme and adding 
uncertainty concerning the financial burden borne by the Community budget. 

– 

JRC  action:  The  JRC  provided  all  available  documentation  to  the  Italian 
stakeholders,  in  order  to  arrive  at  a  settlement  with  the  related  projects.  The 
Commission  continues  its  contacts  at  political  level  in  order  to  arrive  at  a  formal 
agreement on Italian liabilities. 

E: Uncertainties governing the programme, including the cost of final disposal of waste. 
With the absence of a final disposal centre, the fees for final disposal is unknown and so are 
the  parameters  used  to  compute  this  cost6.  This  uncertainty  influences  the  choice  of  waste 
treatment  and  conditioning  procedures7,  and  hence  affects  the  schedule  and  cost  of  the 
programme. 

– 

JRC action: JRC is putting in place contingency planning to cater for the event that 
the uncertainty concerning the waste acceptance criteria persists, in which case the 
JRC will have to refocus the Ispra programme on safe conservation, and postponing 
the  conditioning  of  waste  until  a  final  disposal  option  is  secured.  In  addition,  in 
order to contain the programme's uncertainties, JRC will improve the modelling of 
the risks and the impacts on the programme and devote more effort to the forward 
planning of future phases of the programme. 

F:  Limited  number  of  local  nuclear-qualified  industrial  firms  to  provide  for  site  works: 
this  affects  the  results  of  calls  for  tenders,  which  tend  to  receive  few,  expensive  bids;  this 
makes  it  often  necessary  to  republish  the  calls  with  revised  requirements  or  amendments  to 
the procurement procedure. 

– 

4 

5 
6 

7 

JRC action: JRC is adapting its purchase channels in order to shorten deadlines and 
arouse  more  interest  on  the  part  of  companies  responding  to  calls  for  tenders. 

ICRP  Publication  103,  Volume  37,  Nos.  2-4  2007,  p.116-117  (Public  Exposure-prolonged 
exposure):“The  dose  constraint  should  be  less  than 1mSv  and a  value  of  no more  than  about 0.3mSv 
would be appropriate” 
ENEA and ENEL 
The  question  of  the  fee  for  final  disposal  is  still  open:  should  the  fee  be  based  on  the  volume  of  the 
waste or the space occupied inside the repository could impact on the JRC waste management strategy 
For  example,  depending  upon  the  fee  for  final  storage,  incineration  of  the  waste  could  be  foreseen 
instead of compaction and grouting 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Overall,  however,  JRC-Ispra  is  moving  away  from  small/medium-size  service 
contracts towards turnkey solutions. 

G:  Commission's  internal  procurement  procedures,  which  sometimes  prove  to  be  too 
restrictive given the technically complex nature of the programme, e.g. by allowing too little 
room for effective negotiation of the offers. 

– 

JRC  action:  the  JRC  intends  to  make  the  best  possible  use  of  the  Commission 
procurement rules and staffing rules in order to cope with large and risky industrial 
operations and in particular to negotiate with contractors based on a wide range of 
technical  options  for  providing  turnkey  solutions  against  functional  requirements. 
Moreover,  JRC-Ispra  is  reinforcing  its  decommissioning  team  with  additional 
industrial management capability. 

5.1.3. 

Impact on the Budget 

The total budget for the Ispra programme was reviewed in 2007 with a view to better mitigate 
the risks and uncertainties associated with the further execution of the programme (cf 5.1.2) 
whilst responding to changes, adopted or planned, affecting the programming and cost of the 
decommissioning projects. 

As  a  result,  the  total  revised  budget  for  the  Ispra  programme  amounts  to  €676Mio 2003,  i.e. 
+€37.4Mio 2003  or  +5.9%  in  comparison  with  the  forecast  for  2004.  The  programming  of 
financial commitments was revised accordingly. 

The main factors driving the cost variations are as follows: 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

The  cost  of  implementing  the  waste  management  installations  should  decrease  by 
€6Mio 2003  (-11%),  with  the  effect  of  an  increase  in  the  cost  of  installations  for  the 
treatment of fluids and solid waste being more than offset by a decrease in the cost of 
the waste interim storage building, which now only accommodates class 2 waste, as 
well  as  the  execution  of  services  on-site  instead  of  constructing  fixed  installations 
(super-compaction, cementation). The cost of these services is reported under waste 
management hereafter. 

The  estimated  cost  for  recovering  and  managing historical waste present at the site 
has  been  re-evaluated  as  a  result  of  market  response  to  call  for  tenders  and 
requirements for the acceptance of waste packages at the future national centre. The 
increase is €31Mio 2003 (+75%). 

The management of the waste treatment installations and the provision of the afore-
mentioned  services  (super-compaction,  cementation)  will  be  entrusted  to  external 
providers. The cost amounts to €16Mio 2003. 

The  cost  of  management  (removal  and  interim  storage)  of  nuclear  materials  has 
proved  to  be  considerably  higher  than  expected.  The  estimated  cost  has  been  re-
evaluated  at  €24Mio 2003  (+109%),  of  which  €16Mio 2003  relate  to  the  price  already 
paid for transferring the ownership of unirradiated nuclear materials to third parties. 

The extension of the programme (+ 8 years) following the delay in opening a storage 
centre  in  Italy,  and  the  difficulties  linked  to  purchases  will  prolong  the  costs  of 

EN 

11 

   EN 

 
– 

– 

– 

– 

maintaining  and  monitoring  the  installations  until  2028.  The  estimated  additional 
cost of this item is €28Mio 2003 (+35%). 

Dismantling  nuclear  installations  (reactors  and  hot  laboratories)  has  also  been  re-
evaluated at €10Mio 2003 (+10%) to take into account the increase in waste packages 
linked  to  the  regulatory  requirements  governing  the  resistance  of  the  containers  to 
corrosion for 50 years. 

The  cost  of  final  disposal  of  waste  packages  at  the  future  storage  centre  in  Italy  is 
reduced  by  €27Mio 2003  (-15%)  due  to  the  reduction  in  uncertainties  concerning  the 
volume  of  conditioned  waste.  However,  it  should  be  remembered  that  the  storage 
costs in question have not been confirmed formally. They nevertheless are among the 
highest costs currently incurred in the Member States. 

Other cost adjustments are the result of including the costs of additional services for 
the  installations  (performed  by  outside  companies),  and  deducting  an  Italian 
contribution on account of the 'Italian liabilities' at the site. The combination of these 
two  items  translates  into  a  reduction  of  €6Mio 2003;  this  being  a  very  conservative 
estimate. 

For staff, the estimated cost is reduced by €32Mio 2003 (-30%). This is the result of the 
intention to sub-contract more work to outside companies, which has led to some of 
the cost increases previously described. 

5.2. 

Status of the Programme at Karlsruhe, Geel and Petten 

5.2.1.  Karlsruhe (DE) 

JRC-Karlsruhe faces similar constraints as Ispra, insofar as there is no final national storage 
centre  in  place  yet  in  Germany.  Two  projects  are  under  way,  one  in  the  previous  ore-mine 
“Schacht KONRAD” for the storage of low-activity waste, and the other in Gorleben for the 
storage of all waste, including high-activity waste. 

The  main  ongoing  change  involves  the  removal  of  small  quantities  of  irradiated  nuclear 
materials  which  are  non-homogeneous  and  take  various  forms.  These  residues  come  from 
various experiments which are normally carried out either in collaboration with other research 
centres, or on behalf of nuclear operators. JRC-Karlsruhe has tried to negotiate the treatment 
of part of these plutonium bearing materials in a third party laboratory, but the costs proved to 
be  prohibitive.  Only  the  storage  option  is  currently  being  considered,  but  it  involves 
characterising  the  materials  and  conditioning  them,  which  also  depends  on  the  acceptance 
criteria for the German storage centres. For these reasons the operations which are awaiting 
specifications and availability of installations have been postponed. The programme contains 
a  reasonable  budgetary  provision  for  solving  this  problem.  This  may,  however,  prove  to  be 
inadequate if the requirements for accepting these materials for final disposal are raised. 

In  2007  the  German  Government  specified  its  intentions  concerning  the  KONRAD  storage 
centre  which  is  due  to  open  in  2013.  Also  since  the  last  communication,  the  law  governing 
financial  contributions  from  users  of  German  storage  centres  has  been  changed  as  a 
consequence  of  a  judgment  by  a  Federal  court.  The  advance  payments  on  the  contribution 
from the research centres have been increased considerably, including on a retroactive basis. 

EN 

12 

   EN 

 
For JRC-Karlsruhe, the contribution increased by €21Mio 2003 over the period 1977 to 2012. 
The future opening of KONRAD has led to new standards being drawn up for the acceptance 
of waste which has already been conditioned. 

Additional  measures  must  be  taken  and  monitored  by  the  National  Inspection  Agency.  The 
additional cost to be borne by the JRC amounts to 7.2 Mio2003. 

In addition, JRC-Karlsruhe has to build a new laboratory to fulfil licensing requirements. The 
future liability associated with this new laboratory is estimated at €10Mio 2003  

The budget has been revised as a result and now amounts to €427.2Mio 2003 (compared with 
€389Mio 2003  for  the  last  communication),  that  is  an  increase  of  9.7%  or  €38.2Mio 2003.  As  a 
result the planning for financial commitments has been reviewed (see Annex 1). 

5.2.2.  Geel (BE) 

Costs  and  planning  will  be  as  provided  for  in  the  2004  forecasts  (see  Annex  1),  i.e.  €42.0 
Mio2003. 

5.2.3.  Petten (NL) 

Since 1996, the use of the HFR has been accompanied by the establishment of provisions for 
its decommissioning. These provisions are funded by the Supplementary Programme financed 
by The Netherlands and France for the scientific use of the reactor. At the end of 2007 they 
have amounted to €8.2Mio. In view of the uncertain ty associated with the future of the HFR, 
the JRC chose in 2004 not to take these provisions into account for the time being. The total 
budget for decommissioning at Petten does therefore not change and amounts to €69Mio 2003. 

6. 

PROGRAMME STATUS AND BUDGET AS OF APRIL 2008 (SUMMARY)  

The table below summarises the progress made in the programme implementation, comparing 
the 2003 forecast with the actual progress (April 2008), i.e. comparing what was expected to 
be spent on the programme in 2003 versus the actual spending: 

Mio€ 2003 

Budget Total 

Forecast 2003 

Actual  % of Total 

Geel 

Ispra 

Karlsruhe 

Petten 

Contengencies 

Total 

SEC 2004 
COM 2008 
SEC 2004 
COM 2008 
SEC 2004 
COM 2008 
SEC 2004 
COM 2008 
SEC 2004 
COM 2008 
SEC 2004 
COM 2008 

41,9 
41,9 
638,6 
676,0 
389,0 
427,2 
68,8 
69,1 
6,9 
7,5 
1145,3 
1221,7 

6,8 

165,6 

30,1 

11,1 

0,6 

214,2 

6,9 

119,5 

43,2 

17,1 

0,8 

187,5 

16,1% 
16,6% 
25,9% 
17,7% 
7,7% 
10,1% 
16,1% 
24,7% 
8,4% 
11,1% 
18,7% 
15,3% 

EN 

13 

   EN 

 
 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
The following table summarises the changes between the 2004 values and 2008 values in the 
D&WM Programme costs (all figures in Mio€ 2003). 

Mio€ 2003 

Specific Credits 

Staff Cost 

Total  % of Total 

Geel 

Ispra 

Karlsruhe 

Petten 

Contengencies 

Total 

SEC 2004 
COM 2008 
SEC 2004 
COM 2008 
SEC 2004 
COM 2008 
SEC 2004 
COM 2008 
SEC 2004 
COM 2008 
SEC 2004 
COM 2008 

39,8 
39,8 
531,3 
601,1 
340,0 
378,2 
67,0 
67,0 
0,0 
0,3 
978,2 
1086,4 

2,1 
2,1 
107,3 
74,9 
49 
49 
1,8 
2,1 
6,9 
7,2 
167,2 
135,3 

41,9 
41,9 
638,6 
676,0 
389,0 
427,2 
68,8 
69,1 
6,9 
7,5 
1145,3 
1221,7 

3,7% 
3,4% 
55,8% 
55,3% 
34,0% 
35,0% 
6,0% 
5,7% 
0,6% 
0,6% 
100% 
100% 

The total cost of the programme is now €1222 Mio€
or €76.3Mio€

2003. 

2003 and has increased since 2004 by 6.7% 

7. 

FINANCIAL IMPACT 

There is no additional financial impact foreseen for the period 2008-2013: 

In Mio€ current 

2008 

28,7 

2009 

32,66 

2010 

26,9 

2011 

26,27 

2012 

32,72 

2013 

30,90 

The  next  Communication  to  the  EP  and  the  Council,  foreseen  for  2011,  will  define  the 
amounts to be planned for the new Multiannual Financial Framework. 

8. 

OPINION OF THE GROUP OF INDEPENDENT EXPERTS 

A  Group  of  Independent  Experts  in  the  field  of  decommissioning  and  waste  treatment  was 
proposed at the start of the programme by the JRC and approved by its Board of Governors to 
advise  it  on  the  management  of  its  D&WM  programme.  It  is  made  up  of  European  experts 
originating  from  different  Member  States  and  meets  twice  a  year.  Its  advice  relates  to  the 
decommissioning and waste treatment strategy, the available technology, the organisation and 
management of calls for tender; the management of internal resources, training, and any other 
aspect relating to the above programme. 

The Group has been consulted in particular on the strategic aspects of the programme at Ispra, 
including, for  example, the options for  the  interim store. JRC has obtained essential  advice, 
and ultimately, full endorsement of the strategy adopted. 

EN 

14 

   EN 

 
 
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
The  Group  has  also  been  consulted  on  the  text  of  this  communication  on  which  it  gave  a 
favourable opinion, along with the following comments: 

– 

– 

9. 

– 

– 

– 

The  question  of  the  Waste  Acceptance  Criteria  for  which  Italy  should  give 
reassurance  that  waste  conditioned  today  with  existing  norms  will  not  need  to  be 
reconditioned later or at least that the cost arising from such possible reconditioning 
will not have to be borne by the Ispra D&WM programme. 

The  dose  constraint  for  exposure  of  the  public  to  ionising  radiation  from  nuclear 
activities including decommissioning, treatment and interim storage of waste which 
is  the  lowest  of  all  the  European  countries  (10 µSv/year,  i.e.  between  15  and  100 
times lower than the corresponding constraints set in other European countries, and 
also low compared to the proposals found in the 2007 ICRP recommendations8). The 
influence of such low limits on the cost of some installations to be set up in Ispra is 
to be duly taken into account. 

OPINION OF THE JRC'S BOARD OF GOVERNORS 

The Board of Governors agrees to the submission of the proposed Communication 
to  Council  and  European  Parliament  on  the  progress  of  the  Decommissioning  and 
Waste Management Programme and commends the JRC on progress made to date on 
the original programme. 

The Board of Governors endorses the revised plan, including the revised budget and 
timing,  commends  the  JRC  on  its  efforts  to  contain  the  costs  of  the  original 
programme,  and  encourages  the  JRC  to  continue  negotiations  with  national 
authorities. 

In  view  of  the  underpinning  constraints/uncertainties,  the  Board  suggests  that  an 
update on progress be made to Council and Parliament within 2 years of the date of 
the Communication. 

10. 

CONCLUSIONS 

Significant  progress  has  been  made  since  the  last  Communication  in  2004.  The  removal  of 
nuclear materials, the bringing into operation of several waste treatment and characterisation 
installations and the launch of characterisation for large installations to be decommissioned, 
are some of the key advances made under the Programme. 

The combined effects of external and internal factors, such as procurement procedures, have 
slowed  some  key  activities  of  the  Ispra  programme,  and  added  to  the  predicted  cost  (+6%) 
and timescale of the programme (+8 years for delivery to a national final storage centre). 

A number of uncertainties remain, in particular with regard to the situation in Ispra. 

8 

ICRP  Publication 103, Vol.  37,  N°  2-4-2007,  p.116-117 (Public  Exposure-prolonged  exposure):  "The 
dose  constraint  should  be  less  than  1mSv  and  a  value  of  no  more  than  about  03mSv  would  be 
appropriate" 

EN 

15 

   EN 

 
                                                 
JRC  has  engaged  in  extensive  risk  management  in  order  to  contain  these  uncertainties.  Of 
paramount importance is the resolution of the waste acceptance criteria which otherwise will 
block  the  path  towards  final  disposal.  In  the  event  that  the  uncertainty  around  the  waste 
acceptance criteria persists, JRC may have to refocus the Ispra part of the decommissioning 
programme on safe conservation, and postpone the conditioning of waste until a final disposal 
option is secured. 

EN 

16 

   EN 

 
All figures in Mio€ 2003 

ANNEX 1: Costs and Schedule of the Programme 

Geel 

Ispra 

Karlsruhe 

Petten 

Brussels 

TOTAL 

Commitments 

Staff 

Commitments 

Staff 

Commitments 

Staff 

Commitments 

Staff 

Commitments 

Staff & 

unforeseen 

Commitments 

Staff 

SEC 

COM 

SEC 

COM 

SEC 

COM 

SEC 

COM 

SEC 

COM 

SEC 

COM 

SEC 

COM 

SEC 

COM 

SEC 

COM 

SEC 

COM 

SEC 

COM 

SEC 

COM 

Year 

2004 

2008 

2004 

2008 

2004 

2008 

2004 

2008 

2004 

2008 

2004 

2008 

2004 

2008 

2004 

2008 

2004 

2008 

2004 

2008 

2004 

2008 

2004 

2008 

Total 

39,832 

39,832 

2,104 

2,104 

531,336 

601,133 

107,311 

74,887 

340,001 

378,201 

49 

49,002 

67 

67 

1,819 

2,071 

0,275 

6,939 

7,181 

978,169 

1.086,442 

167,174 

135,245 

<2003 

6,149 

6,149 

21,36 

21,36 

8,789 

8,471 

11,611 

11,611 

39,12 

39,12 

8,789 

8,471 

2003-07 

0,52 

794 

0,1 

116,511 

71,473 

18,921 

17,964 

18,113 

30,66 

0,415 

0,882 

10,9 

16,66 

0,156 

0,408 

0,275 

0,58 

0,561 

146,044 

119,862 

20,173 

19,814 

2008 

2009 

2010 

2011 

2012 

2013 

106 

20,975 

22,333 

5,2 

3,4 

3,533 

2,927 

0,15 

0,165 

0,264 

0,307 

24,508 

25,367 

5,614 

3,872 

24,8 

25,267 

5,2 

3,4 

3,533 

2,896 

0,15 

0,165 

0,264 

0,314 

28,333 

28,163 

5,614 

3,88 

18,65 

16,915 

5,2 

3,4 

3,533 

5,715 

0,15 

0,165 

0,264 

0,328 

22,183 

22,63 

5,614 

3,894 

14,65 

15,056 

5,3 

3,4 

3,533 

6,505 

0,15 

0,165 

0,269 

0,336 

18,183 

21,561 

5,719 

3,902 

19,84 

19,285 

5,3 

3,4 

3,533 

6,915 

0,15 

0,165 

0,269 

0,345 

23,373 

26,2 

5,719 

3,910 

16,55 

19,686 

5,3 

3,4 

3,533 

4,453 

0,15 

0,165 

0,269 

0,36 

20,083 

24,139 

5,719 

3,925 

>2013 

33,163 

32,783 

2,004 

2,104 

278 

389,758 

48,1 

28,05 

289,079 

306,519 

47,685 

47,130 

56,1 

50,34 

1,663 

1,663 

4,758 

4,63 

656,342 

779,4 

104,21 

83,577 

NB: Column Year indicates year of consumption; i.e. before 2003 (<2003), during the period 2003-2007, subsequent years until 2013, beyond 2013 
(>2013). 

Commitment credits are credits spent on equipment, operations and services; Staff credits are credits spent on JRC staff. 

EN 

17 

EN