DRAFT COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT accompanying the REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION  TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL SIXTH SITUATION REPORT RADIOACTIVE WASTE AND SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT IN THE EUROPEAN UNION   COM(2008)542 final
Date: 2010-07-16
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: container, fuel reprocessing, irradiated fuel, nuclear policy, nuclear safety, public opinion, radioactive waste, underground storage of waste

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Brussels 16.7.2010 
SEC(2008) 2416 final/2 

CORRIGENDUM 
Cancels and replaces document SEC(2008) 2416 final of 8.9.2008 
Concerns the EN version 

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 

accompanying the 

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION  
TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL 

SIXTH SITUATION REPORT 
RADIOACTIVE WASTE AND SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT 
IN THE EUROPEAN UNION 

COM(2008)542 final 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
Sixth Situation Report 
Radioactive Waste and Spent Fuel Management in the European Union 

1. 

INTRODUCTION 

The present report is the sixth in the series of reports on radioactive waste management in the 
European Union (EU). The original Situation Reports formed part of the 'Community plan of 
action in the field of radioactive waste'1, which was  further extended in  19922, in particular 
the requirement to 'carry out continuous analysis of the situation'. Although the Plan of Action 
as such is no longer in force, the need for a Situation Report remains as relevant now as when 
it  was  first  conceived.  It  is  important  to  consider  the  challenge  posed  by  radioactive  waste 
since  its  management  is,  and  will  remain,  a  long-term  issue.  Even  over  the  timescale  for 
which  surveillance  of  short-lived  wastes  is  required  national  borders  might  change.  This, 
together  with  potential  cross-border  impacts  means  that  an  international  context  for 
radioactive waste management becomes increasingly relevant with the passage of time. 

There  are  a  variety  of  international  contexts  such  as,  IAEA,  OECD-NEA  and  the  ‘Joint 
Convention’ in which issues concerning radioactive waste management are considered. Each 
of  these  fulfils  an  important  role  in  the  safety  of  waste  management  and  many  of  the  EU 
Member States actively participate in their activities. However it is unlikely that neither the 
role  played  by  any  of  these  actors  is  widely  known  to  the  European  citizen,  nor  are  the 
processes involved particularly accessible to individuals. In some cases they are even carried 
out  away  from  public  scrutiny,  with  only  the  end  result  or  summary  of  proceedings  being 
made available to a wider audience. 

Against  this  background  the  role  of  the  European  Union,  and  in  particular  the  European 
Commission,  in  informing  and  protecting  the  European  citizen  becomes  particularly 
important, as citizens look to the Commission to inform them about the situation and progress 
made throughout  the  Union,  and  to take the lead in ensuring uniformly high standards.  The 
most recent Eurobarometer survey on radioactive waste3 showed that EU citizens wished to 
see Member States take action on radioactive waste without further delay, in that they should 
fix  deadlines  for  the  setting  up  of  management  approaches  for  their  waste.  Additionally 
practices  should  be  harmonised  in  view  of  potential  effects  of  radioactive  waste  beyond 
national borders. Finally the European Union should be able to monitor national practices and 
programmes. The Eurobarometer also showed that if no action were taken, at least concerning 
high-level waste (HLW), the danger existed that this could lead to the impression that there 
are no solutions. 

This  report  presents,  in  line  with  the  previous  report4,  in  the  form  of  tables,  the  status 
concerning  waste  inventories  in  the  EU  Member  States5.  Due  to  the  considerable  time 

1 

2 

3 
4 

5 

Council resolution of 18 February 1980 on the implementation of a Community Plan of Action in the 
field of radioactive waste 
Council  resolution  of  15  June  1992  on  the  renewal  of  the  Community  Plan  of  Action  in  the  field  of 
radioactive waste 
Special Eurobarometer 297 (2008) 
Fifth Situation Report – Radioactive Waste Management in the Enlarged European Union, EN 20653 
EUR, European Commission, February 2003 
Cyprus and Malta produce only small amounts of hospital waste and are not considered further in this 
report 

EN 

   EN 

 
                                                 
required to collect the data, the reference date is end of 2004, except where the availability of 
national  inventories  dictated  otherwise.  Additionally,  where  data  are  available  the  report 
considers the likely evolution of waste quantities over the coming years (to 2020).  

As the report should be accessible, in terms of readability, to as broad a range of stakeholders 
as  possible,  it  is  restricted  in  this  context  to  a  presentation  of  the  overall  radioactive  waste 
quantities, considering generation, storage and disposal at the EU level. In addition possible 
developments over the coming years are considered. It should be pointed  out  that,  far more 
detailed information at the national level can be obtained from a variety of sources, such as 
national waste management organisations (WMO), reports to the Joint Convention etc. 

2. 

SOURCES OF INFORMATION 

The  information  in  the  present  report  has  for  the  most  been  provided  by  the  former 
Commission group of experts known as the Advisory Committee on Programme Management 
(ACPM), which was set up as part of the Community Plan of Action. Where information was 
not  supplied  or  not  readily  available,  public  sources  have  been  used  such  as  national  Joint 
Convention  reports,  IAEA,  submitted  in  20056or  reports  of  national  waste  agencies  or 
government  departments.  Every  effort  has  been  made  to  ensure  the  validity  of  the  data, 
though  the  degree  of  accuracy  is  occasionally  difficult  to  ascertain,  especially  regarding 
precise volumes of lower level wastes for which there are a variety of possible conditioning 
and treatment techniques and for which the degree of treatment and conditioning is not always 
clear. 

The figures in the following tables can be taken as a reasonably reliable guide to the amounts 
of waste produced, stored or already disposed of in the different countries. Also, it should be 
noted that because of the special status accorded to radioactive waste, the quantities are likely 
to be much more accurate than those reported for other hazardous or toxic wastes. 

3. 

CATEGORIES OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE AND SPENT FUEL REPORTED 

The  reporting  categories  correspond  as  closely  as  possible  to  those  in  the  Commission 
Recommendation  on  waste  classification7.  Quantities  refer  only  to  solid,  solidified  or 
solidifiable  waste  and  not  to  effluents  that  are  discharged  to  the  environment  as  part  of 
authorised practices under the supervision of the regulatory body. 

The categories of waste reported are therefore: 

•  LILW-SL  means  short-lived  low  and  intermediate  level  radioactive  waste.  This  is  waste 
that is contaminated mainly with radionuclides with half-lives of less than 30 years and for 
which there is negligible heat generation as a result of radioactive decay. Where disposal 
of this category of waste takes place it is in engineered surface or near-surface repositories. 

6 

7 

The reports under the Joint Convention are submitted in a 3 year term and the deadline for the next ones 
is 11 October 2008 
Commission  Recommendation  of  15  September  1999  on  a  classification  system  for  solid  radioactive 
waste, 1999/669/EC, Euratom 

EN 

   EN 

 
                                                 
•  LILW-LL,  or  long-lived  low  and  intermediate  level  radioactive  waste,  also  produces 
negligible thermal power but has a concentration of long half-life radionuclides above the 
limit  for  classification  as  short-lived  waste.  Disposal  would  normally  take  place  in  deep 
geological repositories.  

•  HLW  means  high-level  waste,  and  refers  to  waste  for  which  the  thermal  power  must  be 
taken  into  consideration  during  storage  and  disposal.  Most  HLW  results  from  the 
reprocessing of spent fuel (SF) and is in the form of vitrified residues. Spent fuel is also 
considered as HLW when it is to be disposed of directly.  

Spent fuel (SF) is also considered in its entirety, whether it might be intended for reprocessing 
or  not,  especially  in  view  of  the  fact  for  a  number  of  states,  there  would  appear  to  be  no 
definitive spent fuel management policy at the present time. 

In addition to the categories of radioactive waste in the Commission Recommendation, that of 
VLLW  (very  low-level  waste)  is  considered  for  the  first  time.  This  reflects  the  gradual 
recognition  over  recent  years,  that  there  are  some  radioactive  wastes  that  require  a  lower 
degree of containment and isolation than that provided by engineered surface and near-surface 
repositories. In fact some of these wastes may not actually be radioactive under the relevant 
national  legislation.  It  may  be  either  not  cost-effective  to  demonstrate  compliance  with  so-
called clearance levels, at which material can be released without further restriction, or there 
may be issues of public concern about the release of such materials. 

Not  all  Member  States  follow  the  Commission  recommendation  on  classification  (which  is 
itself  based  on  an  earlier  scheme  from  IAEA).  However  it  is  normally  possible  to  make  an 
approximation of the relationship between the national classification scheme and that of the 
Commission.  

Uranium  mining  residues  are  not  included  as  they  are  covered  by  a  separate  Commission 
study.  However  it  is  clear  that  these  wastes  should  also  be  included  at  some  point  in  the 
overall quantities of radioactive waste. 

4. 

SOURCES OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE 

It is clear that the greatest source of radioactive waste is from the production of electricity in 
nuclear power plants and other associated activities. For this reason this report focuses mainly 
on this aspect. However it should not be forgotten that radioactive waste is also generated as a 
result  of  non-power  uses  of  radioactive  materials,  such  as  the  manufacture  of  radioactive 
materials  for  use  in  medical  and  industrial  applications,  or  research  facilities  such  as 
laboratories, research reactors etc. In this context it is important to realise that activities take 
place in all Member States that result in the generation of radioactive wastes, even though the 
quantities involved are often very small, compared to countries with nuclear activities. 

5. 

HIGHLIGHTS CONCERNING MEMBER STATES DATA 

5.1.  Evolution of Nuclear Power in Member States (Table A) 

Nuclear power generation and its associated processes e.g. fuel manufacture, reprocessing etc 
are the largest generators of radioactive waste. There is a clear link between the nuclear power 
generation  and  radioactive  waste  generation.  Therefore  it  is  important  to  see  the  possible 

EN 

   EN 

 
evolution  of  nuclear  power  in  the  short-  to  medium-term,  as  this  will  ultimately  affect  the 
amount  of  waste  generated,  from  operational  and  ultimately,  decommissioning  activities.  It 
will  also  affect  the  timeframe  for  their  generation,  although  with  decommissioning  this 
depends on decisions concerning the timing and duration of decommissioning.  

A  number  of  states  currently  have  official  phase-out  policies  e.g.  Belgium,  Germany  and 
Sweden.  Others  could  be  said  to  be  in  a  de  facto  phase-out  situation  i.e.  no  replacement 
capacity planned as current NPPs are closed, such as Spain. In addition there are the NPPs, 
covered  by  early  closure  agreements  as  part  of  the  Treaties  of  Accession  for  Bulgaria, 
Lithuania  and  Slovakia.  Nevertheless  with  construction  already  taking  place  in  four  states 
(Bulgaria, Finland, France, Romania), even under the most restricted scenario NPP capacity 
will fall by just over 20% by 2020, compared to that at the start of 2006. However it is also 
clear that as part of the larger energy debate, construction of new capacity is being discussed 
in a number of states, most notably the Baltic States, the Netherlands, Poland and the UK. It is 
therefore feasible that in 2020, the overall capacity is little changed from the current situation. 

Any  decision  concerning  the  construction  of  new  NPPs  will  of  course  need  to  take  into 
account the effect this will have on the overall radioactive waste situation, since this will lead 
to the generation of additional operational and (in the longer term) decommissioning wastes. 
Such an assessment will require the consideration of both the technical and financial resources 
required  to  deal  with  these  wastes.  There  may  also  be  political  considerations  where 
ownership  of  the  reactors  (and  therefore  also  the  waste  produced)  is  proposed  to  be  shared 
amongst several states. Such a situation already concerns one member state, Slovenia, through 
its joint ownership of the Krško NPP with Croatia. A similar situation may exist in the future 
with Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland. 

5.2. 

Summary of Radioactive Waste Quantities – Actual and foreseen (Tables B-E) 

In  this  section  the  total  wastes  already  disposed  of  or  in  storage  awaiting  disposal  are 
considered. These totals outlined for the different categories of waste are for the 27 Member 
States  considered  in  the  report  and  are  reported  in  tables  B,  C  and  D.  All  quantities  are 
approximate and have been rounded. Since there is no surface disposal – either practised or 
under  consideration  –  in  Germany  and  the  Netherlands,  these  countries  do  not  distinguish 
between  LILW-SL  and  LILW-LL  wastes  and  both  categories  are  consequently  reported 
together. For the purposes of comparison with other Member States it is likely that up to 10% 
of these wastes could be considered as LILW-LL. 

(a) 

Radioactive waste disposed of by the end of 2004: 

The total quantity of waste that has been disposed of to the end of 2004 equals 1,890,000 m3. 
This  consists  almost  entirely  of  LILW-SL,  most  of  which  has  been  disposed  of  in  United 
Kingdom  and  France.  Additionally  for  the  other  14  countries  that  operate  or  have  operated 
NPPs,  only  five  (Czech  Republic,  Finland,  Slovakia,  Spain  and  Sweden)  currently  have 
operational  waste  repositories  for  the  wastes  generated  from  NPP  operation,  although  it  is 
expected  that  this  will  change  in  the  coming  years.  A  number  of  countries  (both  with  or 
without NPPs) have small disposal sites for institutional waste, but these are very limited in 
the wastes they can accept, and some of these sites have required considerable refurbishment 
in recent years to ensure they meet acceptable standards of safety. 

EN 

   EN 

 
(b) 

Annual production of radioactive waste and spent fuel (2004 figures): 

VLLW 18  000  m3  –  most  of  which  arises  and  is  disposed  of  in  France.  (It  should  be  noted 
however  that  UK  does  not  record  generation  and  disposal  of  this  category  of  waste  in  its 
national inventory)  

LILW-SL: 
UK. 

62 000 m3 – of which over 80% is routinely disposed of at sites in France and 

LILW-LL: 
amounts disposed of. 

5  100  m3  –  which  is  conditioned  for  long-term  storage  with  only  minor 

HLW:  280 m3 – all of which goes into long-term storage; no repository exists yet. 

3  600  te  Heavy  Metal  (HM)  –  of  which  at  least  1  500  te  (HM)  can  be  currently 

SF: 
considered as being placed in long-term storage for possible direct disposal. 

Therefore,  in  total,  some  85  000  m3  of  radioactive  waste  are  produced  in  the  EU  each 
year, the vast majority of which is VLLW and LILW-SL. However in order to compare this 
figure  with  that  for  2000  quoted  in  the  5th  Situation  Report,  the  quantity  of  VLLW 
(18 000 m3) should be discounted as it was not included in the overall figures and its rate of 
generation was probably already comparable with the current rate.  

Hence the comparison should be between 39 000 m3 (2000) and 67 000 m3 (2004) these being 
the totals of LILW-SL, LILW-LL and HLW. The 5th Situation Report had already stated that 
it was unlikely that the reduction in waste generation seen in relation to a figure of some 50 
000  m3  (EU  15)  predicted  in  the  4th  Situation  Report  and  a  reported  annual  production  of 
roughly 80 000 m3 (EU 12) at the beginning of the 1990s8 would be continued. It therefore 
seems  clear  that  the  downward  trend  in  overall  waste  generation  has  ceased,  although  this 
observation  can  be  accounted  for  almost  entirely  by  the  increases  in  LILW  in  just  two 
Member States, namely France and the UK. Thus, while there are clear indications that further 
efforts  have  been  made  to  reduce  the  volume  of  operational  waste,  the  observed  trend  is 
possibly  due  to  the  treatment  of  some  historic  wastes  taking  place  and,  possibly  most 
significantly, decommissioning activities which start to play an increasing role in the amount 
of waste generated. Although there has been a reduction in the total installed nuclear capacity 
since 2000 this is unlikely to have had a major effect on volumes of waste generation, since 
major decommissioning works will not have commenced yet. The increase is more likely to 
have arisen as a result of decommissioning activities at installations that have been closed for 
a number of years already; NPPs, fuel cycle facilities and research facilities.  

(c) 

Total of radioactive waste and spent fuel in storage at the end of 2004: 

170  000  m3  –  of  which  almost  75%  is  disposed  of  in  the  VLLW  facility  at 
VLLW: 
Morvilliers  in  France  (again  the  comment  in  the  previous  section  concerning  UK  VLLW 
remains relevant) 

LILW-SL: 

250 000 m3 – of which 120 000 m3 currently has no disposal route 

8 

COM (93)88 final of 1/4/93 “Third report from the Commission on the present situation and prospects 
for radioactive waste management in the European Communities” 

EN 

   EN 

 
                                                 
LILW-LL: 

220 000 m3 – for all of which there is currently no disposal route 

HLW:  7 000 m3 – the majority being vitrified waste from the reprocessing of spent fuel, for 
which there is currently no disposal route 

38 000 te (HM) – of which at least 24 000 te (HM) is or will be placed in long-term 

SF: 
storage for eventual direct disposal 

At this stage, there is still no disposal route available in the EU, or for that matter anywhere in 
the  world,  for  the  most  hazardous  radioactive  waste  i.e.  that  represented  by  the  categories 
HLW and  spent  fuel  to  be disposed of directly. As  a result the amounts indicated in the 5th 
Situation  Report,  have  increased  still  further.  These  materials  remain  stored  in  temporary 
surface  and  near  surface  storage  facilities  in  those  EU  Member  States  with  active  or  past 
nuclear  power  programmes.  The  above  figures  also  show  that  there  are  significant 
accumulations of stockpiled waste in other less hazardous categories, including LILW-SL for 
which many countries still do not have access to disposal sites, even though disposal of this 
category has taken place routinely, in engineered facilities, for several decades now. 

(d) 

Additional radioactive waste and spent fuel arisings from 2004 to 2020: 

VLLW: 

440 000 m3 – of which almost 85% will arise in France 

LILW-SL: 
current disposal route 

900  000  m3  –  of  which  almost  400  000  m3  will  arise  in  countries  with  no 

LILW-LL: 
almost 80% will arise in UK 

430 000 m3 – for all of which there is currently no disposal route and of which 

HLW:  2 300 m3 – the majority being vitrified waste from the reprocessing of spent fuel. 

48 000 te – of which at least 23 000 te will be placed in long-term storage for direct 

SF: 
disposal 

These  figures  represent  quantities  of  wastes  and  spent  fuel  generated  additional  to  those 
already existing at the end of 2004. As can be seen from the above figures the rate of waste 
generation in the VLLW and LILW will continue to increase in the short- to medium-term, 
with  most  of  the  increase  coming  from  decommissioning  activities,  dominated  by  the 
programme in the UK, especially in terms of LILW-LL. 

The figures are somewhat speculative since they rely on the assumption that certain decisions 
will  be  taken  e.g.  timing  of  decommissioning  activities  (immediate  vs.  delayed).  However 
whatever  decisions  are  taken  these  wastes  will  arise,  only  the  timing  can  be  changed.  It  is 
feasible  that  further  volume  reduction  is  achieved  through  changes  in  waste  conditioning 
techniques;  however  this  will  not  affect  the  overall  radioactivity  (and  hazard)  of  the  waste, 
only the repository space that might be required. 

There  will  be  little  change  in  spent  fuel  generated,  since  the  reactor  closures,  especially  in 
Germany  and  UK,  will  take  place  gradually  over  the  period.  Additionally  the  effect  of 
defuelling of closed reactors (removal of all spent fuel from the reactor core) is an additional 
consideration. What will change over the period is balance between reprocessing (HLW) and 
direct  disposal  (SF).  The  last  German  SF  for  reprocessing  was  transported  in  2005,  in  line 
with the agreement on the phase-out of nuclear energy. Belgium is currently continuing with 

EN 

   EN 

 
its moratorium on reprocessing, already in place since 1993. No further reprocessing contracts 
have been signed for UK domestic fuel, with reprocessing operations in Sellafield possibly to 
continue  until  at  least  2015  for  Thorp  and  2016  for  Magnox.  This  means  that,  assuming 
present  policies  continue,  only  three  Member  States,  Bulgaria,  France  and  the  Netherlands 
will  reprocess  their  spent  fuel,  likely  to  be  less  than  1000  te  annually.  Italy  has  stated  its 
intention to reprocess its remaining spent fuel. 

6. 

DEVELOPMENTS IN WASTE POLICIES AND PRACTICES (TABLES E-L) 

In this section a general overview is given of Member States' policies and practices, together 
with financing aspects and the responsibilities concerning implementation 

6.1.  Policies and Practices: 

Since the previous Situation Report, a good example of new legislation for radioactive waste 
management has been adopted in France. It covers all types of waste streams up to the final 
disposal. 

6.1.1.  Spent Fuel / HLW 

The  first  choice  facing  Member  States  is  their  choice  of  spent  fuel  management  policy  i.e. 
reprocessing  or  direct  disposal.  The  first  option  will  recover  plutonium  and  uranium  for 
possible  re-use,  but  also  generate  HLW,  LILW-LL  and  LILW-SL,  all  of  which  will  require 
disposal.  In  the  case  of  the  first  two  categories,  this  should  take  place  in  a  deep  geological 
repository.  Currently  five  states  make  use  of  the  reprocessing  option;  Bulgaria,  France, 
Germany (in the case of the remaining spent fuel at reprocessing facilities), the Netherlands 
and UK. Italy also intends to reprocess the remaining fuel from its closed reactors. If current 
plans  are  pursued,  Germany  will  no  longer  reprocess  fuel  once  the  current  contracts  expire. 
The  UK  is  still  keeping  open  the  option  of  new  business  for  Thorp,  but  any  new  contracts 
would need Government approval. Belgium has a moratorium on new reprocessing contracts 
since 1993. In the past Spain exported a small amount of fuel for reprocessing, but has since 
stored all fuel at its NPPs (Spain is planning a centralised storage facility for HLW and spent 
fuel to be operational before 2011). 

Where  spent  fuel  is  not  to  be  reprocessed,  the  normal  management  option  is  an  extended 
period  of  storage,  at  least  30  years,  followed  by  deep  geological  disposal.  For  these  other 
states direct disposal of  spent fuel forms the reference management scenario. Currently two 
states,  Finland  and  Sweden  are  actively  pursuing  this  option.  However  in  the  majority  of 
states a definitive spent fuel policy does not exist, other than arrangements to ensure a safe 
extended period of storage (50 – 100 years).Whatever the management route chosen, the only 
disposal  option  for  HLW  /  spent  fuel  is  deep  geological  disposal.  Although  most  states  are 
committed  in  principle  to  this  option,  it  is  likely  that  by  2025  only  three  states  will  have 
operational  deep  repositories  for  HLW  /  spent  fuel;  Finland,  France  and  Sweden.  Although 
Germany has a target date of 2030, this looks increasingly difficult, in view of the continuing 
moratorium  on  exploration  work  at  the  Gorleben  site  and  the  limited  follow-up  to  the  2002 
AkEnd study the issue of repository siting for all wastes. 

Beyond this group of states only Belgium has an underground laboratory, with notional dates 
for  construction  (2025)  and  operation  (2040)  of  a  repository.  In  the  UK,  the  NDA's  current 
planning  assumption  is  that  a  repository  will  be  ready  to  accept  HLW  by  2040.  For  the 

EN 

   EN 

 
remaining  states  target  dates  for  operational  repositories  are  from  around  2050  onwards,  if 
one has even been set at all. Generally the work carried out in this latter group of countries 
has been rather limited, even as regards setting out a procedure for the various steps towards a 
repository. 

Most  of  these  countries  (those  with  smaller  nuclear  programmes)  participated  in  the 
SAPIERR  project  under  the  Euratom  6th  Framework  Programme  (FP6),  exploring  the 
conditions  to  be  met  for  a  possible  shared  repository.  A  follow-up  project:  SAPIERR  II 
commenced at the end of 2006 and can be seen as the second step of a long-term, adaptively 
staged  decision-making  process.  The  main  objective  of  SAPIERR  II  is  to  propose  an 
European development strategy and organisational structure to manage the process. 

Finally, some countries have only very small quantities of spent fuel originating from research 
reactors  only.  Generally  the  management  solution  is  covered  by  ‘take-back’  agreements, 
where the spent fuel is returned to the country of origin.  

6.1.2.  LILW-LL 

Like  HLW  /  spent  fuel  it  is  generally  acknowledged  that  LILW-LL  requires  disposal  in  a 
geological  repository.  This  category  of  waste  arises  largely  through  reprocessing  operations 
and decommissioning. As the disposal route is the same as for HLW, it also follows that in 
general  terms  the  progress  in  terms  of  disposal  routes  is  similar  (Germany  might  be  an 
exception  here  as  for  non-heat  developing  long-lived  waste  a  deep  repository  might  be 
operational  before  2014).  It  should  be  noted  that  some  states  which  give  dates  for  HLW 
disposal  actually  make  no  mention  of  this  type  of  waste  in  terms  of  disposal  dates  or  even 
how  it  should  be  disposed  of.  Open  questions  include  whether  or  not  HLW  and  LILW-LL 
should be co-disposed i.e. placed in the same repository. It should be mentioned however that 
the  short-term  hazard  presented  by  conditioned  LILW-LL  is  significantly  less  than  that  of 
HLW.  However  the  overall  disposal  volumes  will  be  considerably  greater.  In  terms  of 
implementation  it  is  likely  that  by  2020  Denmark,  Germany  (assuming  use  of  Konrad)  and 
Hungary  will  have  operational  repositories  capable  of  taking  this  type  of  waste,  although 
mainly due to these countries policy of disposing all radioactive wastes in deeper facilities. 

6.1.3.  LILW-SL 

This  category  represents  the  largest  volume  of  waste  in  all  Member  States.  It  is  here  that 
polices and practices are most developed. Disposal normally takes place in engineered surface 
or  near-surface  facilities.  In  the  sixteen  ‘NPP  states’  seven  currently  practice  disposal  in 
surface  or  near  surface  facilities.  In  addition  a  number  of  countries  are  at  various  stages  of 
implementation from conception through to final construction. By 2020 it is likely that all the 
‘NPP  states’  with  the  exception  of  the  Netherlands,  will  have  an  operational  repository  for 
these wastes. In addition, Denmark and Latvia should also have operational repositories. 

6.1.4.  VLLW  

As already stated the concept of VLLW arose to deal with those wastes where the degree of 
isolation and confinement required is considerably reduced compared to LILW-SL. Currently 
France,  Sweden  and  UK  carry  out  large-scale  VLLW  disposals.  Lithuania  and  Spain  are 
currently constructing disposal facilities and it is likely that others will do so as the need to 
manage large volumes  of decommissioning wastes arises in the  future.  Those countries  that 
intend  to  use  only  deep  disposal  for  their  wastes  e.g.  Germany  and  the  Netherlands,  are 

EN 

   EN 

 
unlikely  to  categorise  any  waste  as  VLLW,  but  instead  will  probably  make  use  of  the 
possibility of clearance to enable wastes to be disposed of as conventional waste or recycled. 
France  has  decided  against  large-scale  clearance  of  such  wastes,  on  both  cost  and  public 
perception grounds. 

6.1.5.  Other Wastes 

Although  not  generally  considered in  this  report  there  are  radioactive  wastes  generated  as  a 
result  of  non-nuclear  activities:  These  include  sealed-sources  and  medical  isotopes.  Most 
countries  now  have  arrangements  in  place  whereby  ‘take-back’  provisions  must  be 
incorporated  into  the  supply  contract.  Nevertheless  there  are  large  numbers  of  historical 
sealed-sources not covered by such provisions. When disposal facilities become available for 
the  full  range  of  fuel-cycle  generated  wastes,  they  should  also  be  able  to  take  radioactive 
wastes  from  other  activities.  However  for  the  smaller  countries,  that  do  not  have  sufficient 
waste to justify construction of a repository, solutions will still need to be found. 

6.2.  Financing  

It is not the intention to cover this aspect in detail, since the Commission already publishes 
detailed  reports  on  the  financing  of  decommissioning  and  waste  management  activities9. 
Additionally 
recommendation  concerning 
decommissioning and waste management funds10. It can be seen however from Table F that 
for  all  states  where  information  is  available,  funding  mechanisms  are  in  place  or  are  under 
preparation. 

the  Commission  published  a 

in  2006 

6.3.  Organisational Responsibilities  

An  area  that  has  seen  further  developments  since  the  5th  Situation  Report  is  that  of 
responsibilities in the field of waste management and in particular the role played by Waste 
Management  Organisations  (WMO).  Since  2000  eight  Member  States  have  established  or 
reorganised their WMO. The role of such organisations varies widely between Member States 
from  those  concentrating  mainly  on  repository  development  and  operation  e.g.  ANDRA  in 
France, to those which have responsibility for all historic liabilities including site operation, 
such  as  in  Slovakia  (JAVYS)  and  UK  (NDA).  Additionally  the  status  varies  from  that  of  a 
public  utility  to  subsidiary  of  commercial  NPP  operators,  as  in  Sweden  (SKB)  and  Finland 
(Posiva).  

Although  in  some  smaller  countries  there  is  a  dedicated  WMO,  there  are  several  where  the 
quantity  of  waste  concerned  would  not  justify  such  an  organisation.  In  these  cases  a 
department of the radiation protection regulator usually takes responsibility for such matters. 
In Greece and Portugal, the responsibility is taken by the national research centres which in 
any case are also the main generators of radioactive waste. 

9 

10 

COM(2007) 794 of 12.12.2007 - Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and 
the Council – Second Report on the use of financial resources earmarked for the decommissioning of 
nuclear installations, spent fuel and radioactive waste 
Commission  Recommendation  of  24  October  2006  on  the  management  of  financial  resources  for  the 
decommissioning of nuclear installations, spent fuel and radioactive waste 

EN 

   EN 

 
                                                 
It  would  seem  that  there  is  no  single  model  for  a  successful  WMO.  The  main  requirement 
would  seem  to  be  that  responsibilities  are  clearly  laid  down  and  that  there  are  adequate 
financial arrangements. 

7. 

INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENTS - JOINT CONVENTION (TABLE M) 

The  Joint  Convention  is  considered  here  separately  as  it  has  become  a  significant 
contributor setting the principles for the management of radioactive waste and spent 
fuel in the EU. Of the current 27 Member States 24 have acceded to the Convention, 
as has  the Euratom Community itself. This latter is significant since as a result the 
Convention  becomes  part  of  Community  legislation.  Along  with  the  individual 
national  reports  from  Member  States,  a  Euratom  report  was  presented  to  the  2nd 
Review  Meeting  of  the  Convention  during  2006.  The  Community  was  represented 
during the Review meeting by the Commission, allowing it to observe at first hand 
and contribute to the review process. 

Details of the review process and summary reports from the meeting can be found on 
the IAEA website11. It is generally agreed that the convention has the potential to be 
an  incentive  for  participants  to  make  progress  in  the  safety  of  waste  management 
through  feedback  from  other  participant  states.  This  is  especially  true  when  the 
contracting parties are using the review process to drive a continual improvement in 
safety  of  radioactive  waste  management  rather  than  just  demonstrating  compliance 
with the articles of the convention..  

8. 

CONCLUSIONS 

8.1.  Waste Quantities 

An  increase  has  been  observed  in  the  rate  of  generation  of  the  volume  of  radioactive  waste 
since the 5th Situation Report. This concerns mainly the categories LILW-SL and LILW-LL. 
Annual generation of HLW / SF, which generally depends on the size of the nuclear power 
programme, remains broadly constant. 

Quantities of waste in storage have increased, especially HLW and LILW-LL as there are as 
yet no disposal routes available.  

8.2.  Developments in Waste Policies and Practices 

It  is  generally  possible  to  identify  the  policies  and  practices  of  Member  States  concerning 
waste and spent fuel management. In the case of VLLW and LILW-SL it is likely that almost 
all Member States with nuclear power programmes (and some 'non-nuclear power' states) will 
implement disposal solutions in the medium term i.e. by 2020. 

However  for  HLW  and  spent  fuel  (for  direct  disposal)  only  a  handful  of  states  i.e.  those 
actively pursuing repository development can be said to have definitive policies in place. The 
same  situation  exists  for  LILW-LL,  since  for  these  wastes  also  the  preferred  solution  is 
geological disposal, whether in the same repository as HLW /spent fuel or separately. 

11 

http://www-ns.iaea.org/conventions/waste-jointconvention.htm 

EN 

   EN 

 
                                                 
8.3.  Organisational Responsibilities 

In  all  Member  States  the  responsibilities  concerning  waste  management  seem  to  be  clearly 
identified  and  assigned,  with  significant  roles  given  to  national  waste  management 
organisations. 

8.4. 

International Developments 

The  Joint  Convention  to  date  appears  to  have  been  a  driver  in  promoting  and  assuring 
improvements in the safety of waste management. This is likely to continue, although there is 
some concern about how some states attempt to use the review process. 

EN 

   EN 

 
9. 

DATA TABLES  

Table A 

Nuclear installed capacity 

Table B 

Table C 

Waste quantities disposed of by end of 2004 

Waste and spent fuel production in 2004 

Table D 

Waste and spent fuel in Storage 

Table E 

Table F 

Table G 

Table H 

Table I 

Table J 

Additional waste and spent fuel arisings to 2020 

Financing schemes for radioactive waste 

Radioactive waste management organisations (WMO) 

Principal underground research laboratories (URL) and exploratory 
mines for HLW / SF 

National management strategies for radioactive waste and spent fuel 

Bodies with responsibilities in the management of radioactive waste 
and spent fuel 

(I) Member States with active or past nuclear power programmes 

(II) Member States without nuclear power programmes 

Table K 

Interim storage facilities for vitrified high-level waste 

Table L 

Interim storage facilities for spentfuel 

Table M 

The Joint Convention – ratification status 

Abbreviations and Acronyms 

13

14

16

18

20

22

27

28

29

34

37

38

39

39

28

EN 

xii 

   EN 

 
 
 
Table A: 

Nuclear installed capacity 

country 

installed 
capacity at 
June 2008 
(GWe) 12 

Belgium 

 5.82 

comments 

Predicted 
capacity at end 
2020 (GWe) 

comments 

Bulgaria 

 1.91 

1.91 under 
construction 

Czech Rep. 

 3.62 

1.60 under 
construction 

1.60 under 
construction 

covered by an 
early closure 
agreement 

0.66 under 
construction 

0.82 covered 
by an early 
closure 
agreement; a 
further 0.82 
construction 
suspended 

Finland 

 2.70 

France 

63.26 

Germany 

20.47 

Hungary 

Lithuania 

 1.83 

 1.19 

Netherlands 

 0.48 

Romania 

 1.30 

Slovakia 

 2.03 

Slovenia 

Spain 

 0.67 

 7.45 

Sweden 

UK 

 9.01 

10.22 

Total EU-27 

131.96 

In principle NPPs close after 
40 years operation 

In principle NPPs type 
VVER 213 close after 30 
years operation 

Assuming continuation of 
phase-out policy 

Assuming construction of 2 
EPR type units 

Lifetime extension agreed for 
single BWR NPP 

Possible further 2 CANDU 
units 

Assuming completion of 
Mochovce units 3 and 4 

For the purposes of planning 
and calculation the General 
Radioactive Waste Plan 
considers 40 years service 
lifetime for the existing NPPs 

4.04 

3.81 

1.93 

4.28 

64.70 

1.70 

1.76 

3.20 

0.45 

2.62 

1.62 

0.68 

7.38 

8.91 

2.44 

109.13 

12 

Figures were calculated based on extract from IAEA Priss Data base – June 25, 2008 

EN 

13 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
Table B:  Waste quantities disposed of by end of 2004  

country 

quantity (m³) 

period 

origin / type of 
waste13 

type of disposal14 

site(s) 

still in use? 

Belgium 

Bulgaria 

Czech Rep. 

Estonia 

Finland 

France 

Germany 

15,000 

260 

4 700 

330 

6 300 

880 

110 

4 140 

1 230 

9 900 

527 000 

137 000 

18 200 

96 

16,150 

North Atlantic 

no 

till 1982 

LILW 

1964-1994 

institutional 

ocean 

surface 

1994-present 

NPP operational 

surface 

1958-1965 

institutional 

mine (limestone) 

1964-present 

institutional 

mine (limestone) 

1972-present 

institutional, only 
natural 
radionuclides 

mine (uranium) 

Novi han 

Dukovany 

Hostím 

Richard 

Bratrství 

1963-1995 

institutional 

RADON 

Tammiku (Saku) 

1992-present 

NPP operational 

rock cavern 

VLJ-repository, Olkiluoto 

1998-present 

NPP operational 

rock cavern 

Loviisa 

1967-1969 

1969-1994 

1992-present 

2003-present 

1967 

1967-1978 

LILW 

LILW-SL 

LILW-SL 

VLLW 

LILW 

LILW 

ocean 

surface 

surface 

surface 

ocean 

deep 

North Atlantic 

Centre de la Manche 

Centre de l’Aube 

Morvilliers 

North Atlantic 

Asse salt mine 

yes, but for 
storage only  

yes 

no 

yes 

yes 

no 

yes 

yes 

no 

no 

yes 

yes 

no 

no 

13 

14 

EN 

Institutional = waste from non-fuel cycle sources but including waste from operation of research reactors (generally LILW-SL); NPP operational = low-level waste from day 
to day activities and operations at NPP (generally LILW-SL); NORM = waste containing Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material. 
Surface = surface vaults / trenches + subsequent capping. RADON is a specific vaulted design developed by the Russian company of the same name. Mine and rock caverns 
generally some tens of metres depth. Deep = >~100 m depth. International moratorium on ocean / sea disposal since 1983. 

14 

EN 

 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
country 

quantity (m³) 

period 

origin / type of 
waste13 

type of disposal14 

site(s) 

still in use? 

Germany (cont.) 

36,753 (includes 6,617 
SRS) 

1971-1998 

LILW 

deep 

Morsleben Repository 

no 

Hungary 

5000 

1976-present 

institutional + 
formerly NPP 
operational 

surface 

Püspökszilágy 

yes, but space 
very limited  

Italy 

Latvia 

Lithuania 

The Netherlands 

Poland 

Romania 

Slovakia 

Spain 

Sweden 

23 

800 

120 

8 700 

2 800 

1 370 

2 380 

51 170 

30 446 

3929 

7346 

3471 

999 

United Kingdom 

33 000 

1967 

LILW 

1963-present 

institutional 

ocean 

RADON 

1963-1988 

institutional 

RADON 

till 1982 

LILW 

1961-present 

institutional 

ocean 

surface 

North Atlantic 

no 

Baldone 

Maišiagala 

North Atlantic 

Różan 

yes, but very 
small scale 
disposal only  

no 

no 

yes 

yes, operation 
under review 

1985-2000 

institutional 

mine (uranium) 

Baita-Bihor 

1999-present 

1992-present 

1989-present 

1986-present 

1986-present 

1993-present 

1988-present 

1949-1982 

LILW-SL 

LILW-SL 

LILW-SL 

VLLW 

VLLW 

VLLW 

VLLW 

LILW 

surface 

surface 

rock cavern 

surface 

surface 

surface 

surface 

ocean 

surface 

surface 

Mochovce 

El Cabril 

SFR-1 

Forsmark(FKA) 

Oskarshamn (OKG) 

Ringhals (RAB) 

Studsvik 

North Atlantic and UK coastal 
waters 

Near village of Drigg 

Dounreay 

yes 

yes 

yes 

yes 

yes 

yes 

yes 

no 

yes 

no 

960 000 

33 000 

1959-present 

LLW 

1959-2002 

LILW-SL 

EN 

15 

EN 

 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table C:  Waste and spent fuel production in the year 2004 

Quantities of spent fuel discharged and waste produced per category during 2004 

Country 

VLLW 
(m3) 

LILW – SL 
(m3) 

LILW – LL 
(m3) 

HLW15 
(m3) 

SF 
(te HM) 

comments 

Austria 

Belgium 

Bulgaria 

Czech Rep. 

Denmark 

Estonia 

Finland 

France 

Germany 

Greece 

Hungary 

Italy 

Latvia 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

108 

437 

335 

272 

15 

- 

260 

16 600 

23 600 

12 

- 

16 

1 

5 

1 

612 

- 

4.2 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

133 

- 

116 

50 

58,4 

- 

- 

69 

1150 

- 

- 

- 

300 

15 

4068 

65 

385 

2 

190 

300 

- 

- 

5 

- 

3 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

43 

- 

- 

90% decommissioning waste 10% institutional 
waste  

LILW  is  waste  conditioned  during  2004;  HLW  is 
waste from one transport from La Hague 

NPP wastes estimate - does not include 300 m3 NPP 
liquid waste 

LILW-LL consists of all material conditioned at La 
Hague and Marcoule in 2004, and includes some 
pre-2004 wastes. 

Does  not  include  approx  1200  m3  intermediate 
products 

Estimate  after  decay  storage  and  conditioning  of 
solid waste 

Does not include 260 m3 NPP liquid waste 

15 

It should be noted that HLW arises from the reprocessing of SF. Production of HLW therefore results in a reduction in SF stocks.  

EN 

16 

EN 

 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
Country 

Lithuania 

Poland 

The 
Netherlands 

Portugal 

Romania 

Slovakia 

Slovenia 

Spain 

Sweden 

United 
Kingdom 

VLLW 
(m3) 

1140 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

45 

- 

EN 

Quantities of spent fuel discharged and waste produced per category during 2004 

LILW – SL 
(m3) 

LILW – LL 
(m3) 

HLW15 
(m3) 

SF 
(te HM) 

comments 

75 

0.5 

- 

100 

LILW-SL may contain some LILW-LL 

22.9 

LILW-SL may contain some LILW-LL 

107 

380 

1000 

LILW-SL may contain some LILW-LL 

Prior to 2004 data reported as LILW-SL was for 
LLW only. Some LILW-LL may be suitable for 
shallow disposal if it meets the conditions for 
acceptance. VLLW which can be disposed of by 
controlled burial at landfill sites is not formally 
reported in the UK Radioactive Waste Inventory. 

934 

46 

353 

5 

54 

300 

37 

745 

1426 

5 400 

41 

7 

39 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

363 

30 000 

- 

1.5 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

76 

17 

EN 

 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table D:  Waste and spent fuel in storage 

Country 

VLLW 
(m3) 

LILW – SL 
(m3) 

LILW – LL 
(m3) 

HLW 
(m3) 

SF 
(te HM) 

comments 

Quantities of spent fuel and waste in storage at end of 2004 

Austria 

Belgium 

Bulgaria 

Czech Rep. 

Denmark 

Estonia 

Finland 

France 

Germany 

Greece 

Hungary 

Italy 

Latvia 

1800 

200 

- 

- 

13 000 

4 000 

444 

2 675 

- 

4 

125 

1 

40 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

943 

891 

- 

- 

1 416 

Any remaining SF will be shipped to USA under 
'take back agreement'  

Does  not  include  200  m3  radium-contaminated 
wastes 

Does not include liquid wastes (7 400 m3) 

The small amount of SF is considered as LILW-LL 

Mainly from decommissioning of former submarine 
training centre at Tammiku 

92 600 

128 761 

1 851 

2 000 

8 279 

In addition probably around 3 000 te at NPP 

3 109 

HLW  includes  448  m3  untreated  heat-generating 
wastes. LILW includes 47 500 m3 untreated wastes 
and intermediate products. 

840 

Total vitrified waste to be returned 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

128 000 

- 

- 

- 

7 636 

4510 

1 100 

400 

1 940 

98 700 

70 

1 214 

8 000 

17 000 

- 

- 

Lithuania 

26 000 

57 900 

The Netherlands 

- 

8550 

EN 

- 

740 

247 

- 

Liquid  waste  awaiting  processing  (4  700  m3)  not 
included 

Small quantities of sealed sources only 

1 820 

Does not include liquid wastes 

2 

- 

- 

8 000 

- 

760 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

5 

18 

EN 

 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country 

VLLW 
(m3) 

LILW – SL 
(m3) 

LILW – LL 
(m3) 

HLW 
(m3) 

SF 
(te HM) 

comments 

Quantities of spent fuel and waste in storage at end of 2004 

Poland 

Portugal 

Romania 

Slovakia 

Slovenia 

Spain 

- 

- 

- 

4 000 

- 

5760 

30 

1000 

472 

15 000 

2362 

30230 

4 

- 

11 

50 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

0.6 

- 

767 

770 

313 

1146 

13 

3 195 

Sweden 

United Kingdom 

3 940 

- 

7 881 

2 000 

4 900 

- 

105 000 

1 200 

4 930 

8 000 

Does not include liquid wastes (300 m3) 

LILW-SL includes some LILW-LL 

HLW currently stored in France; LILW-LL 666 m3 
stored  in  France  and  the  rest  stored  on  site  at 
Vandellos 1 NPP from its decommissioning. VLLW 
also  stored  on  site  at  Vandellos  1  from 
its 
decommissioning 

ILW and HLW include waste arising from the 
reprocessing of fuel for foreign customers 

EN 

19 

EN 

 
  
 
 
 
 
Austria 

Belgium 

Bulgaria 

Czech Rep. 

Denmark 

Estonia 

Finland 

France 

Germany 

Greece 

Hungary 

Italy 

Table E: 

Additional waste and spent fuel arising to 2020 

Country 

VLLW 
(m3) 

LILW – SL 
(m3) 

LILW – LL 
(m3) 

HLW 
(m3) 

SF 
( te HM) 

comments 

Waste and spent fuel arising to 2020 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

1440 

160 

- 

- 

Decommissioning waste from ASTRA research 
reactor and other facilities on Seibersdorf site 

6 600 

6 000 

5000 

900 

- 

4 800 

1 600 

1500 

75 

- 

5 

7 

29 

1 400 

HLW consists of returns from La Hague 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

950 

SF in principle sent for reprocessing 

2150 

- 

- 

Includes decommissioning of DR 1 

1 500 

SF includes Olkiluoto-3  

370 000 

400 000 

49 300 

1 770 

19 600 

SF in principle sent for reprocessing 

93 500 

900 

5 420 

- 

- 

- 

- 

30 

5 400 

30 000 

- 

- 

9 000 

1000 

Latvia 

50 

40 

Lithuania 

48 000 

114 000 

6 600  

The Netherlands 

- 

5 100 

EN 

- 

600 

- 

- 

620 

200 

- 

- 

60 

- 

- 

20 

20 

HLW  consists  of  returns  from  Sellafield  and  La 
Hague 

Estimate  after  decay  storage  and  conditioning  of 
solid waste 

HLW consists of returns from La Hague. LILW 
consists of decommissioning wastes. 

Wastes mainly from decommissioning of Salaspils 
research reactor 

Spent fuel estimated, as all is sent for reprocessing. 
Estimated split for LILW is 600 m3 LILW-LL and 
4500 m3 LILW-SL.  

EN 

 
  
 
 
 
 
Country 

VLLW 
(m3) 

LILW – SL 
(m3) 

LILW – LL 
(m3) 

HLW 
(m3) 

SF 
( te HM) 

comments 

Waste and spent fuel arising to 2020 

Poland 

Portugal 

Romania 

Slovakia 

Slovenia 

Spain 

Sweden 

- 

- 

- 

- 

10 000 

12 000 

540 

70 

1 800 

12 000 

855 

10 100 

12 000 

75 

- 

- 

- 

- 

750 

1 800 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

Based on current rate of generation 

3 400 

LILW-SL includes some LILW-LL  

750 

LILW-SL mainly from decommissioning of 
Bohunice-V1, will include some LILW-SL 

220 

LILW-SL includes some LILW-LL  

2425 

See table D for returns from France 

2 700 

United Kingdom 

- 

100 000 

390 000 

530 

10 000 

 ILW and HLW include waste arising from the 
reprocessing of fuel for foreign customers 

EN 

21 

EN 

 
  
 
 
 
Table F: 

Financing schemes for radioactive waste 

country 

basis for allocation of charges to waste 
producers 

mechanisms for financing longer term liabilities16 

Austria 

Belgium 

Bulgaria 

Czech Rep. 

A price list updated annually, and approved 
by  the  regulatory  authority,  includes  the 
actual 
of  waste  management 
(transport,  treatment,  conditioning,  interim 
storage)  payable  to  Nuclear  Engineering 
Seibersdorf GmbH 

cost 

‘Polluter  pays’  principle:  Costs  are  waste 
category  specific  and  proportional  to  the 
volume within each category. 

Since the beginning of 2003, all holders of radioactive waste and orphan sources for disposal are 
obliged to make contributions to a fund for final disposal. Users have to pay this fee to WMO. 
WMO  regularly  transfers  the  collected  fees  to  the  Federal  Ministry  of  Agriculture,  Forestry, 
Environment  and  Water  Management,  where  this  fund  has  been  separately  set  up  for  the 
exclusive purpose of the later final disposal of the conditioned radioactive waste. 

 WMO  is  responsible  for  the  management  of  all  radioactive  waste  in  Belgium  and,  all 
radioactive waste has to be transferred from the producer or owner to WMO. Upon transfer, the 
producer or owner pays to WMO the amount which covers the future management costs. These 
provisions are managed by WMO. 

SF  management  cost  included  in  NPP 
operation.  Waste  management  activities 
carried  out  by  SERAW;  budget  is  covered 
by national fund. 

Segregated external funds were created in 1999 to cover decommissioning and waste liabilities. 
Under the 2003 Regulation funds are collected from radioactive waste producers and managed 
by  the  Ministry  of  Economy  and  Energy  in  a  dedicated  fund.  Funds  allocated  to  cover  the 
annual activity programme. Some activities are financed by EU under PHARE and also through 
the Kozloduy International Decommissioning Support fund (KIDSF). 

into 

the  Nuclear 
Payments  are  made 
Account  and  cover  all  of  activities 
connecting with SF and waste disposal and 
repository  operation.  Small  producers  pay 
on acceptance of their waste for disposal. 

State-controlled  segregated  fund  –  the  Nuclear  Account  –  receives  contributions  from  waste 
producers including the nuclear operator who pays levies according to the average production of 
electricity. Each producer pays according to his share of the total waste and the estimated costs 
of the WMO’s activities, which are updated according to economic or waste management policy 
changes.  The  WMO  is  responsible  for  collecting  these  charges,  monitors  the  adequacy  of  the 
reserve and approves any withdrawal. 

A segregate decommissioning reserve is created. 

Denmark 

Fees  charged  for  items  received  from 
outside Danish Decommissioning 

State  support  as  the  major  costs  will  arise  as  a  result  of  the  decommissioning  of  the  research 
facilities at Risø. 

16 

WMO = Waste Management Organisation (refer to Table G) 

EN 

22 

EN 

 
  
                                                 
country 

basis for allocation of charges to waste 
producers 

mechanisms for financing longer term liabilities16 

Estonia 

Finland 

Payment is made by waste producers at the 
time  of  transfer  of  their  waste  into  interim 
storage.  At  present,  no  distinction 
in 
charges is made between different types of 
waste. 

State  pays  for  “historical  waste”  liabilities  such  as  the  former  soviet  nuclear  naval  training 
facility  at  Paldiski  and  its  implementation  was  entrusted  to  the  Estonian  Radioactive  Waste 
Management Agency (A.L.A.R.A.). 

The  nuclear  power  companies  and  the 
operator  of  the  research  reactor  present 
annual  cost  estimates 
future 
management  of  nuclear  wastes  and  ensure 
that  funds  are  deposited  with  the  State 
Nuclear Waste Management Fund. 

the 

for 

According to the Nuclear Energy Act the licence holder has an obligation to take responsibility 
for all nuclear waste management measures and their appropriate preparation (including 
decommissioning costs), and shall cover all the related expenses. This is done by gathering 
adequate funds for future investments in an independent Finnish State Nuclear Waste 
Management Fund. 
To guarantee against the insolvency of the nuclear utilities, they shall provide securities to MTI 
for the part of financial liability which is not covered by the Fund. 

France 

Unit  volume  (or  commercial  tariff  for 
for 
specified  packages)  on  delivery 
disposal.  

For  VLLW  and  LILW-SL  disposal  is  financed  through  commercial  contracts  between  the 
producer  and  ANDRA.  For  LILW-LL  and  HLW  waste  producers  build  up  provisions  on  the 
basis of an evaluation by ANDRA. 

Germany 

the  cost 

State  bears 
initial 
development  of  repositories.  These  costs 
are  recovered  through  contributions  (cost 
per unit volume) or advanced payments. 

the 

for 

The regulatory situation and organisation of nuclear decommissioning and waste management in 
France underwent profound change in 2006 with the adoption new legislation on nuclear waste 
research and management. ANDRA has to set up an internal restricted fund in order to finance 
the storage of long lived high and medium level wastes. The fund will be fed by contributions 
from the nuclear operators under bilateral conventions. The nuclear operators will set up internal 
restricted funds covered by dedicated assets managed under separate accountability. 

For  privately  owned nuclear  facilities  i.e. NPPS provisions are  allocated to the foreseen  costs. 
Provisions for management of radioactive waste from operation are made according to the waste 
generated. 

For publicly owned facilities costs are finance d through the annual public budget. 

EN 

23 

EN 

 
  
country 

basis for allocation of charges to waste 
producers 

Hungary 

Official  tariff  list  set  by  ministerial  decree 
for small producers. 

Official current estimate € 7 000 / m3 forms 
basis  of  estimate  for  waste  management 
liabilities. 

mechanisms for financing longer term liabilities16 

The Central Nuclear Financial Fund, a separate Treasury account made up of the contributions 
of 
the  nuclear  power  plant  operator,  will  cover  all  future  waste  management  and 
decommissioning  costs.  Annual  payments  into  the  fund  by  Paks  Nuclear  Power  Plant  are 
proposed  by  the  Minister  supervising  the  Hungarian  Atomic  Energy  Authority  (HAEA). 
Payments are based upon submittals prepared by the PURAM and approved by the HAEA and 
by the Hungarian Energy Office. 

ENEL  transferred  its  long-term  liabilities  fund  for  decommissioning  and  waste  management 
(about €750 million) to SOGIN on its creation. As these were judged insufficient an additional 
levy per kWh, adjusted every 3 years has been implemented. The levy is fixed by the National 
Authority for the Electricity and Gas on the basis of Sogin’s annual program of activities. 

Fees  collected  by  BAPA  for  management 
services as well directly from state budget. 

Natural  resource  tax  payable  on  radioactive  substances  imported,  which  generate  waste 
requiring  disposal  in  Latvia.  Additional  disposal  vault  and  storage  facility  at  Baldone  funded 
under PHARE. 

NPP  operator  contributes  to  the  national 
fund  for  the  decommissioning  of  Ignalina 
NPP.  Other  waste  producers  contribute 
through charges to the finances of RATA. 

NPP  operator  and other  waste  producers  contribute  through  charges  to  the  finances  of  RATA, 
which  is  responsible  for  managing  all  waste  according  to  the  national  strategy.  There  are  also 
national  and  international  funds  for  the  decommissioning  of  Ignalina  and  management  of  the 
wastes.  The  NPP  decommissioning  fund  is  financed  through  a  levy  of  6%  on  the  price  of 
electricity  sold.  It  co-finances  waste  management  activities  with  the  Ignalina  International 
Decommissioning Support Funds. 

Italy 

Latvia 

Lithuania 

The Netherlands 

For LILW: treatment, volume and radiation 
level  of  conditioned  waste.  For  HLW: 
reserved capacity (volume).  

For waste management and final disposal funding the operators pay volumetric fees to Central 
Organisation for Radioactive Waste (COVRA). COVRA then takes over full title of the waste 
(i.e. ownership and liability). 

Poland 

Portugal 

Romania 

Funds  available  through  state  budget  or 
from services carried out by RWMP. 

No arrangements currently for some long-term activities These will be provided from the state 
budget as required. 

Part of estimated cost per item of waste. 

None. Portugal has no relevant activities or installations in the nuclear field. 

Annual  allocation  of  charges  to  waste 
producers (to cover operational costs of the 
new WMO called ANDRAD). 

The Government Ordinance 31/2006 defines two segregated funds; one for spent fuel and 
radioactive waste management and the second one for decommissioning of nuclear facilities. 
The funding mechanism is scheduled by the end of 2007 (plan: pay a fee based on a certain 
amount per MWh of electricity delivered). 

EN 

24 

EN 

 
  
country 

basis for allocation of charges to waste 
producers 

Slovakia 

NPP  operational  wastes  management 
funded from operating budget. 

mechanisms for financing longer term liabilities16 

the  mid-nineties.  The  State  Fund  for 
A  national  fund  has  steadily  built  up  since 
Decommissioning  of  Nuclear  Installations  and  Management  of  Spent  Fuel  and  Radioactive 
Wastes  restructured  in  2004.  The  fund  is  managed  by  the  Ministry  of  Economy.  Annual 
contributions  by  NPP  operators  are  as  a  levy  on  the  electricity  price  to  the  end  user.  The 
contributions  are  reviewed  at  five  year  intervals.  There  is  co-funding  of  activities  with  the 
Bohunice International Decommissioning Support Fund. 

Slovenia 

Spain 

Sweden 

Small  waste  producers  (medicine,  industry 
and  research)  pay  ARAO  for  services 
provided  on  the  basis  of  a  price  list 
established by government decree. 

The  Fund  for  the  Decommissioning  of  the  Krško  NPP  is  financed  through  a  levy  on the  kWh 
electricity  production.  The  purpose of the  Fund  is  to  collect  money  as  a  levy on the produced 
electricity for future decommissioning and for the disposal of radioactive waste and spent fuel. 
The  Fund  operates  as  an  independent  legal  entity  and  its  work  is  overseen  by  a  Supervisory 
Committee. 

The National up-front Fund for the 
activities contemplated in the General Plan 
for RWM and Decommissioning is being 
done through incomes collected during the 
facilities lifetime based on cost estimations. 

Costs estimations are subjected to annual 
revision by the Government. 

Costs  for  operational  LILW  disposal  are 
paid  for  directly  by  producers.  Costs  for 
management  of  spent  fuel  and  long-lived 
LILW  are  levied  on  power  generators  (i.e. 
waste  producers)  by  means  of  fees  on 
generated electricity. 

According to the Royal Decree 5/2005 an updated financing system has been set up. 

The revenues transferred to the Fund arise from: 
The amounts collected via the supply and access tariffs for the entire electricity sales. 
Billing  to  NPPs  licensees  for  the  amount  resulting  from  multiplying  the  gross  KWh  monthly 
generated by each plant by a specific unit value, applicable to waste and SF originated beyond 
31st March 2005. 
Idem  to  2  referring  to  the  Juzbado  Fuel  Assemblies  Manufacturing  Plant  by  annual 
contributions. 
Billing to the licenses of radioactive installations outside the nuclear cycle via tariffs approved 
by the MITyC. This case invoicing is done when the waste is collected by ENRESA.  
The  Nuclear  Waste  Fund  administrated  by  a  special  Board  and  invested  with  the  Swedish 
National Debt Office, though SSM (regulator) advises Government, on the basis of an estimate 
made by SKB, regarding the size of the fees and must approve the main disbursements. The fees 
are reviewed annually. Additional guarantees are requires to cover early closure of NPPs (< 25 
years operation) and unforeseen and unforeseen waste management costs. The funds are set up 
as  external  segregated  funds  with  considerable  oversight  especially  with  respect  to  fund 
investment. 

EN 

25 

EN 

 
  
 
country 

basis for allocation of charges to waste 
producers 

mechanisms for financing longer term liabilities16 

United Kingdom  Charges  are  levied  by  waste  managers  on 
waste producers for disposal of Low Level 
Radioactive Waste (LLW). For higher level 
wastes,  no  charges  are  levied  at  present, 
there being no disposal facilities available  

Historic  liabilities  (previously  owned  by  BNFL  and  the  UKAEA)  assumed  by  NDA  will  be 
funded through a combination of continued commercial operation of some facilities and the state 
budget. The NDA’s strategy for dealing with radioactive waste is dependent on the outcome of 
reviews initiated by the UK Government. British Energy has its own segregated fund to cover its 
own liabilities. 

EN 

26 

EN 

 
  
Table G: 

Radioactive waste management organisations (WMO) 

Country 

WMO 

Comments 

Austria 

NES 

Public /Private. An affiliate of Austrian Research Centers 
GmbH (ARC) 

Belgium 

Bulgaria 

ONDRAF/NIRAS 

Public, established in 1980 

SERAW 

Public, established in 2004 

Czech Rep. 

SÚRAO (RAWRA) 

Public, established in 1997 

Denmark 

DD  

Public, established in 2003 

Estonia 

Finland 

France 

A.L.A.R.A. AS 

Public, established in 1995  

POSIVA 

ANDRA 

Private, established in 1995 by NPP operators 

Public, established in 1991 

Germany 

DBE  

Hungary 

Italy 

Latvia 

Lithuania 

PURAM 

SOGIN  

BAPA 

RATA 

Public under authority of BfS (Federal Office for 
Radiation Protection) 

Public, established in 1998 

Public, established in 1999 

Public, established in 2005 

Public, established in 2001 

The Netherlands  COVRA  

Public, established in 1982 

Poland 

Romania 

Slovakia 

Slovenia 

Spain 

Sweden 

RWMP 

ANDRAD 

JAVYS 

ARAO 

ENRESA  

SKB AB 

United Kingdom  NDA 

Public, established in 2002 

Public, established in 2003 

Public, established in 2005  

Public, established in 1991 

Public, established in 1984 

Private, owned by NPP operators, established in 1972 

Public, established in 2005 (Its predecessor WMO, Nirex, 
was established in 1982) 

EN 

27 

   EN 

 
Table H: 

Principal underground research laboratories (URL) and exploratory mines for

HLW / SF 

country 

URL 

Operator 

details 

Belgium 

HADES 

EURIDICE (cooperation of 
ONDRAF / NIRAS & 
SCK⋅CEN 

Finland 

Onkalo 

Posiva 

France 

Bure 

ANDRA 

Tournemire 

IRSN 

Germany 

Asse mine  

DBE 

Gorleben 

DBE 

Boom clay (plastic) at ~ 230m depth on 
SCK⋅CEN site at Mol; has been 
extended as part of ongoing PRACLAY 
project 

Under construction, characterisation 
planned 2009 onwards at 520m depth, 
planned to be incorporated into disposal 
facility with first disposal ~ 2020 

Callovo-Oxfordian clay (hard) at ~ 450 
to 500 m depth. Meuse Department. 
Construction completed in 2006 

sediments (hard clay), 250 m depth; 
started 1990; former railway tunnel & 
adjacent galleries; methodological 
laboratory only 

Former potash / rock salt mine; R&D 
facility until 1997. Closure currently in 
preparation and scheduled for 2013. 

Salt dome at 800m depth. Exploration 
works since 1986. Moratorium since 
2000 

Sweden 

Äspö HRL 

SKB 

granite, 200 - 500 m depth 

Stripa mine 

SKB 

Switzerland  Grimsel Test 

NAGRA 

Site 

Granite, former iron ore mine 360 – 410 
m research from 1977- 1991. Now 
closed 

granite, reached through main access 
tunnel of hydro power company KWO~ 
450 m depth; operational since 1983 

Switzerland  Mt. Terri 

Project 

Swiss Federal Office of 
Topography 

opalinus clay (hard), ~ 400 m depth; 
gallery off a road tunnel; started 1995 

EN 

28 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
Table I: 

National management strategies for radioactive waste and spent fuel 

country 

Austria 

Belgium 

VLLW (if applicable) & LILW 

Interim storage of conditioned waste (LILW) at the 
Research Center Seibersdorf. Study in 2001 concluded 
that surface disposal was not an option in view of the 
presence of long-lived waste. However, in view of the 
small quantities a regional solution is the preferred option 

Interim storage of conditioned waste at the Belgoprocess 
site in Dessel pending the availability of a disposal site. 
Surface disposal repository planned for Dessel, with 
construction commencing around 2011. 

Bulgaria 

Processing of all waste. Construction of a national near-
surface repository for LILW-SL (both institutional and 
from NPP) by 2015. The repository should assure storage 
of waste not suitable for near surface disposal.  

Czech Rep. 

Treatment and conditioning of all waste, disposal in one 
of the operation disposal sites or safe storage of waste 
that can not be deposited in the existing repositories.  

Denmark 

Estonia 

Interim storage of conditioned waste at Risø National 
Laboratory. Repository concept under development. 
"Basis for Decision" outlining development expected to 
be approved. 

All waste from the decommissioning of Paldiski and from 
institutional sources is conditioned for long-term storage 
at Paldiski pending the availability of a disposal route. 

HLW / SF 

- 

Storage at the Belgoprocess site of returned vitrified waste from reprocessing at La 
Hague. SF is now being stored in AFR facilities on NPP sites – current policy is a 
moratorium on further reprocessing contracts. However both open and closed fuel 
cycle scenarios are considered. Underground research continuing at the HADES 
facility at Mol concerning the concept of deep geological disposal in clay. 
Construction of a deep geological repository would not start before 2025, with 
possible operation around 2040. The WMO is a member of ARIUS and participated in 
the SAPPIERR project. 

Transfer of SF for storage and reprocessing in Russia with HLW return, under terms 
of 1995 agreement. SF can be declared waste if a disposal route is available. Storage 
of SF in reactor ponds and wet store at Kozloduy. Dry store to be commissioned 
around 2009, which can store both SF and HLW (after return from Russia). Decision 
on HLW disposal concept around 2012. Bulgaria participated in the SAPIERR project. 

Long term interim storage of all SF pending the availability of a disposal route. The 
national management strategy does not foresee a deep geological disposal site in 
operation before 2065. Six possible locations have been identified. It is anticipated a 
deep repository will accommodate all the waste that can not be deposited in near-
surface repositories, SF once it is declared as waste and HLW from decommissioning. 

International solution being sought for small amount of SF remaining in line with 
earlier solutions regarding SF from research reactors. 

None (all SF from the Paldiski training reactors was returned to Russia) 

EN 

29 

EN 

 
  
country 

Finland 

France 

Germany 

Greece 

Hungary 

VLLW (if applicable) & LILW 

HLW / SF 

Routine disposal of operational NPP waste in 
underground (intermediate depth) repositories at the two 
NPP sites. 

SF stored in AFR facilities on NPP sites. The Decision in Principle by the Finnish 
Parliament in 2001 endorsed the selection of Olkiluoto as the site for the development 
of a deep disposal facility, subject to approval by the regulatory authorities. The 
repository is planed for operation around 2020. Posiva is now constructing the 
underground research facility Onkalo, which is planned to be part of the planned 
repository.  

Routine disposal of short-lived LILW at the Centre de 
l’Aube facility. Centre de Morvilliers opened in 2003 for 
disposal of VLLW. Long-term storage of conditioned 
LILW-LL pending development of disposal solution 

Routine reprocessing of most, but not all, SF. Unreprocessed SF is stored at La Hague. 
Deep geological disposal of HLW, based on investigations in Bure underground 
laboratory. Decision on a site expected by 2015, with operation of a repository by 
2025. 

In line with its objective to dispose of this waste in deep 
geological formations, the Federal Government is not 
pursuing any plans for near-surface repositories. After the 
dismissal of court cases against the licence issued for the 
Konrad repository in 2002, covering non-heat developing 
waste, work has started to transform the former iron ore 
mine into a repository. Disposal operations are planned to 
start at the end of 2013. 

Wastes are stored at the NCSR Demokritos and in users’ 
premises under GAEC inspection. 

Institutional LILW-SL waste still to be disposed of at 
Püspökszilágy, though spare capacity is limited. An 
underground repository (200m) for NPP operational and 
decommissioning LILW waste is under construction at 
Bátaapáti, to be operational by 2008. 

Returned vitrified waste following reprocessing of SF at La Hague or Sellafield is 
stored at Gorleben. Final transport of SF for reprocessing took place in 2005. No 
further contracts are allowed All new generated SF is placed in dry stores adjacent to 
NPPs, until availability of deep geological repository.  

The Federal Government is aiming to establish a repository in deep geological 
formations for the disposal of all kinds of waste, including spent fuel assemblies, by 
the year 2030. All activities at the Gorleben site remain actually suspended. Since 
November 2005 the present government aims to find solutions and progress by 2009. 
SF return to supplier state 

Long term interim storage of all SF in AFR facility pending the availability of a 
disposal route. The reference scenario is domestic direct disposal in deep geologic 
repository, although other scenarios are kept open. The current target is to finalize 
URL by 2012, with possible SF/HLW repository operation by the end of the 2040's 
(candidate site at Boda). PURAM is a member of ARIUS and participated in the 
SAPIERR project. 

Ireland 

The small quantities of waste are stored on site by users. 

- 

EN 

30 

EN 

 
  
country 

VLLW (if applicable) & LILW 

HLW / SF 

Italy 

Latvia 

Lithuania 

Wastes to be conditioned and stored at point of origin. A 
national disposal facility is foreseen for VLLW and 
LILW-SL. As yet no timetable for implementation, 
although the stated aim of decommissioning all facilities 
by 2020 will require the availability of a disposal option.  
Wastes  from  decommissioning  of  Salaspils  will  be 
disposed  of  at  Baldone,  which 
is  currently  being 
expanded. LLLW-LL stored pending availability of deep 
repository  (national  or  regional);  Latvia  participated  in 
the SAPIERR project. 

VLLW  disposal  facility  currently  under  construction. 
Confirmed site for disposal of LILW-SL at Stabatiškė, in 
the  vicinity  of  the  Ignalina  NPP.  The  design  work  is  to 
start  in  2008,  the  construction  in  2012,  and  the  near-
surface repository is to be  commissioned in 2015. Initial 
investigations  for  an  intermediate-depth  repository  for 
waste not acceptable for near-surface disposal. 

The 
Netherlands 

Long-term  interim  storage  of  conditioned  waste  at  the 
COVRA  facility  in  Borssele.  (Near)  surface  disposal 
option not considered. 

Portugal 

Interim storage at the DPRSN facility at Sacavém. 

Poland 

Disposal  of  Institutional  LILW  at  the  Różan  facility, 
together  with  interim  storage  of  long-lived  waste.  Some 
siting  activities  have  taken  place  for  a  replacement 
repository, but have stalled due to lack of local support at 
the concerned sites. 

All  remaining  SF  stored  in  NPP  ponds  and  will  be  exported  for  reprocessing.  A 
centralised  store  for  the  HLW  returned  is  envisaged.  In  principle  HLW  and  any 
remaining  SF  will  be  disposed  of  in  a  deep  geological  disposal.  Italy  participated  in 
the SAPIERR project and participates in SAPIERR II. 

SF from the research reactor at Salaspils is planned to be moved out of Latvia in the 
framework of USA–IAEA–Russia co-operation project and proposed Latvia–Russia 
governmental Agreement on co-operation in the spent fuel management. 

SF categorized as radioactive waste. Storage in dry store for at least 50 years prior to 
disposal  in  deep  geological  repository.  Some  initial  investigations  have  taken  place. 
Lithuania participated in the SAPIERR project and participates in SAPIERR II. 

All  SF  to  be  reprocessed  and  vitrified  wastes  returned  and  stored  in  the  HABOG 
facility at Borssele. Current policy is long-term interim storage (100 years) prior to a 
definitive decision. Participated in the SAPIERR project and participates in SAPIERR 
II. 

Small quantities of HLW stored at Sacavém. All research reactor spent fuel returned to 
USA. 

SF  is  in  temporary  pond storage  at  Swierk  from  research  reactors.  Placement  of this 
material into dry storage is underway, financed by state budget and under PHARE. 

EN 

31 

EN 

 
  
country 

Romania 

Slovakia 

Slovenia 

Spain 

Sweden 

VLLW (if applicable) & LILW 

HLW / SF 

Disposal  of  institutional  short-lived  waste  at  Baita  Bihor 
site.  NPP  operational  wastes  to  be  disposed  of  in  near 
surface  repository,  planned 
till  2014. 
Conditioning of LL-LILW and storage minimum 50 years 
prior to deep geological disposal together with SF. 

to  be  built 

Open  fuel  cycle,  SF  considered  as  radioactive  waste.  Six  years  wet  storage  at  NPP, 
followed by minimum 50 years in Spent Fuel Dry Store. Deep geological disposal in a 
national  repository  that  should  be  available  around  2050.  Regarding  the  SF  from 
research reactors – return to the country of origin and/or deep geological disposal in 
the national repository. 

All suitable wastes are sent to the Mochovce facility for 
disposal (both institutional and NPP operational waste). 
VLLW disposal facility under consideration. Wastes not 
suitable for Mochovce stored pending availability of deep 
geological repository. 

Storage of SF for 50 years followed by deep geological disposal. Other alternatives are 
also considered. A proposal for back-end fuel-cycle policy is expected in 2007. As yet 
there is no timetable for repository development. Slovakia was represented in the 
SAPIERR study and is represented in SAPIERR II as well. 

All waste currently being stored – mainly at Krško NPP – 
pending the availability of a national repository. The site 
should be determined around 2008, with operation around 
2013. 

All SF is currently stored in the AR pond at Krško NPP – there is sufficient space for 
the  projected  reactor  lifetime.  Current  plans  include  operation  of  a  dry  store  from 
2023, with an operational deep geological repository around 2065, although export is 
also considered. 

Routine  disposal  of  VLLW  and  short-lived  LILW  at  the 
El Cabril facility. VLLW repository at El Cabril available 
since July 2008. LILW-LL stored pending availability of 
a deep geological repository. 

Routine disposal either in surface facilities at nuclear sites 
(VLLW)  or  in  SFR-1  underground  facility  close  to 
Forsmark  NPP 
(LILW-SL).  Planned  disposal  of 
decommissioning  waste  in  an  extension  to  SFR-1  with 
operation  in  2020.  A  repository  for  LILW-LL  will  be 
sited in about 2035. 

The  GRWP  in  force  considers  as  a  basic  element  of  the  reference  scenario  an  open 
cycle strategy. 

Since 1982 all SF is currently stored in AR fuel ponds; except at Trillo NPP, where a 
dry  cask  AFR  storage  has  operated  since  2002.  Some  vitrified  waste  is  due  to  be 
returned from France around 2010 by the reprocessing of the SNF from Vandellos 1 
(Gas  Cooled  Reactor).  GRWM  plan  assumes  the  availability  of  a  central  SF  store 
around the same time and a HLW / SF repository around 2050. 

All  SF  is  stored  centrally  in  the  CLAB  facility  at  Oskarshamn.  The  WMO  is 
proceeding  with  detailed  site  investigations  at  two  possible  deep  disposal  sites,  with 
the approval of the local municipalities and the government. Site selection is expected 
around 2008, with repository operation around 2018. 

EN 

32 

EN 

 
  
country 

United 
Kingdom 

VLLW (if applicable) & LILW 

HLW / SF 

Routine  disposal  of  LLW  at  the  Low  Level  Waste 
Repository near to the village of Drigg in Cumbria. Plans 
exist for surface repository at Dounreay for LLW wastes 
from  that  site.  LILW-LL  is  stored  at  the  sites  of 
production  and  is  being  progressively  conditioned  into  a 
form  suitable  for  long-term  management.  LILW-LL  will 
be disposed of in a deep geological repository. 

All  remaining  Magnox  fuel  will  not  be  reprocessed  until  2016  or  later.  AGR 
reprocessing  contracts  will  be  fulfilled  by  2011,  leaving  3500  te  AGR  and  1200  te 
PWR fuel in storage. Since 2006, official policy for HLW is deep geological disposal, 
together with the appropriate long-term storage.  

EN 

33 

EN 

 
  
Table J: 

Bodies with responsibilities in the management of radioactive waste and spent fuel   

(I) Member States with active or past nuclear power programmes17 

country 

category of waste 

regulatory authority 

waste treatment 
and/or conditioning 

waste transport 

development and/or 
operation of interim 
storage facilities 

development 
and/or operation 
of disposal 
facilities 

Belgium 

Bulgaria 

Czech Rep. 

Finland 

LILW 

HLW / SF 

LILW 

HLW / SF 

LILW 

SF 

LILW 

SF 

FANC 

NRA 

WMO & waste 
producers 

WMO 

WMO 

WMO (& industry for SF) 

WMO 

Waste Producer /WMO

Industry 

SÚJB 

Waste Producer 

Waste Producer 

WMO 

Industry 

Waste Producer and 
WMO 

NPP Operator 

WMO 

WMO 

WMO 

STUK 

Waste Producers 

Industry 

Industry 

Waste Producer 

France 

LILW & HLW / SF 

ASN 

Industry and WMO 

Industry 

Germany 

LILW 

HLW / SF 

BfS 

waste producers 

waste producers 

- Industry for short-term 
interim storage: industry 
- R&D for long-term 
storage: CEA 

waste producers and/or 
collecting depots 
(Landessammelstellen) 

industry 

WMO 

WMO 

DBE acting on 
behalf of BfS 

17 

WMO = Waste Management Organisation (refer to Table G) 

EN 

34 

EN 

 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
Hungary 

Italy 

Lithuania 

LILW 

SF 

LILW 

HLW / SF 

LILW 

SF 

HAEA18 

APAT 

Waste producers 

WMO 

Industry and WMO 

WMO 

WMO 

NUCLECO for non-
fuel cycle wastes 
SOGIN for NPP 
wastes 

commercial 
operators 

NUCLECO for non-fuel 
cycle wastes SOGIN for 
NPP wastes 

ENEA 

VATESI (RSC for 
institutional waste) 

waste producers 

waste producers 
(WMO for 
institutional waste) 

Waste producer 

WMO (NPP for 
VLLW) 

The Netherlands  LILW & HLW / SF 

VROM (KFD) 

Romania 

Slovakia 

LILW 

SF 

LILW 

SF 

CNCAN 

ÚJD SR 

Slovenia 

LILW / SF 

URSJV 

Spain 

LILW & HLW / SF 

MITYC & CSN 

WMO & waste 
producers 

WMO 

WMO 

IFIN for institutional 
waste; industry for 
NPP waste 

IFIN for institutional 
waste; industry for 
NPP waste 

IFIN for institutional 
waste; industry for NPP 
waste 

WMO + waste 
producers 

WMO + waste 
producers 

WMO & waste 
producers 

industry 

WMO 

industry 

WMO 

WMO 

WMO / waste producers 

WMO 

WMO & waste producers 

WMO 

WMO 

WMO 

WMO 

WMO 

18 

EN 

The Office of the National Chief Medical Officer, as the licensing authority for radiation protection regulation, also participates in the nuclear safety licensing procedure. 

35 

EN 

 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
Sweden 

United Kingdom

LILW 

SF 

LILW 

HLW / SF 

SSM 

Waste producer 

Waste producer & 
WMO 

WMO 

WMO 

WMO 

waste producers 

waste producers 

Waste producers 

WMO 

- HSE (NII) for safety of 
nuclear installations 
- EA (England & Wales) 
and SEPA (Scotland) for 
discharges to the 
environment and disposal 

EN 

36 

EN 

 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
(II) Member States without nuclear power programmes 

country 

Austria 

Nuclear  Engineering  Seibersdorf  GmbH  (NES)  is  responsible  for  radioactive  waste  management.  The  Federal  Ministry  of  Agriculture,  Forestry, 
Environment  and  Water  Management  has  the  main  responsibilities  for  regulation,  licensing  and  supervision  in  the  field  of  radioactive  waste 
management 

Responsible bodies 

Cyprus 

The Radiation Inspections and Control Service of the Ministry of Labour and Social Insurance is responsible for licensing concerning sealed sources 

Denmark 

Danish Decommissioning (DD) is responsible for radioactive waste management. The Nuclear Regulatory Authorities are the Nuclear Office under 
the Danish Emergency Management Agency and the National Institute of Radiation Hygiene under the National Board Of Health. 

Estonia 

Greece 

Ireland 

Latvia 

A.L.A.R.A.  AS  is  responsible  for  radioactive  waste  management.  The  regulatory  authority  is  the  Ministry  of  the  Environment  through  the 
Environmaental Inspectorate and the Estonian Radiation Protection Centre ERPC) 

The management of radioactive waste is carried out by the NCSR Demokritos. The regulator is the Greek Atomic Energy Commission. 

The Radiological Protection Institute of Ireland is responsible for the regulation of the storage, transport and disposal of radioactive waste arising 
from the use of radioisotopes. 

The State Hazardous Waste Management Agency (BAPA) is responsible for radioactive waste management. The regulator is the Radiation Safety 
Centre (RDC). 

Luxembourg 

The  Radiation  Protection  Department  of  the  Ministry  of  Health  is  responsible  for  interim  storage  of  disused  sealed  sources.  The  regulator  is  the 
Ministry of Health. 

Malta 

Poland 

Portugal 

The Radiation Protection Board is responsible for all licensing issues concerning use of radiation sources. 

The  Radioactive  Waste  Management  Plant  (RWMP)  is  responsible  for  radioactive  waste  management.  The  regulatory  authority  is  the  National 
Atomic Energy Agency (PAA) 

The  Department  of  Radiological  Protection  and  Nuclear  Safety  (DPRSN),  of  the  Nuclear  and  Technical  Institute  (ITN)  under  the  Science, 
Technology and Higher Education Ministry, is responsible for radioactive waste management. The national responsible authorities are the ITN, the 
General  Directorate  for  Health  of  the  Ministry  of  Health  and  the  Ministry  of  Environment.  Since  2005  there  is  an  Independent  Commission  for 
Radiological Protection and Nuclear Safety. 

EN 

37 

EN 

 
  
Table K: 

Interim storage facilities for vitrified high-level waste 

country 

facility / site 

period of 
operation 

comments 

Belgium 

Dessel, Belgoprocess, Building 129 

1982 - 

Dessel, Belgoprocess, Building 136C 

2000 - 

Bulgaria 

France 

Kozloduy 

La Hague 

Marcoule 

2009 - 

under construction 

up to ~2050  

up to ~2050  

Germany 

BLG (Brennelementlager Gorleben) 

1995-2035

The Netherlands  HABOG (COVRA site, Borssele) 

2003 - 

Storage for at least 100 years 

United Kingdom  Vitrified Product Store, Sellafield 

1990 - 

EN 

38 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table L: 

Interim storage facilities for spent fuel 

country 

facility/site 

facility type19 

Belgium 

Doel NPP 

AFR dry cask 

Tihange NPP 

AFR pool 

Dessel 

AFR Dry cask 

Bulgaria 

Kozloduy NPP 

AFR pool 

period of 
operation 

1995 - 

1997 - 

2001 - 

1989 - 

comments 

Kozloduy NPP 

Dry cask 

2009 - 

Under construction 

Czech Rep.  Dukovany NPP 

AFR dry cask 

Dukovany NPP 

AFR dry cask 

Temelin NPP 

AFR dry cask 

Finland 

Loviisa NPP 

AFR pool 

Olkiluoto NPP 

AFR pool 

France 

La Hague 

pool 

Germany 

Ahaus-BZA 

dry cask 

Gorleben-BLG 

dry cask 

Greifswald-ZAB 

AFR pool 

Greifswald-ZLN 

AFR dry cask 

5 reactor sites 

AFR dry cask 

1997 - 

2006 - 

2010 - 

1978 - 

1979 - 

1992 - 

1995 - 

1986 - 

1997 - 

2001 - 

Planned 

extension from 1985 

extension from 1987 

Storage for reprocessing 

Temporary facilities; 4 in 
operation at end 2006 

13 reactor sites 

AFR dry cask 

2002 - 

10 in operation at end 2006 

Hungary 

Paks NPP 

AFR dry vault 

1997 - 

modular design 

Italy 

Trino NPP 

Caorso NPP 

Avogadro 

AR pool 

AR pool 

AFR pool 

Lithuania 

Ignalina NPP 

AFR dry cask 

1965 - 

1981 - 

1971 - 

1999 - 

CASTOR- and CONSTOR-
RBMK casks 

Romania 

Cernavoda NPP 

AFR dry vault 

2003 - 

MACSTOR 

Slovakia 

Bohunice NPP 

AFR pool 

Spain 

Trillo NPP 

AFR dry cask 

1986- 

2002 - 

Sweden 

CLAB 

pool 

1989 - 

Fuel from other reactors stored in 
reactor ponds pending 
construction of central store 

19 

Only centralised stores, AFR stores at NPP sites and AR stores at shutdown reactors are listed. All operating 
NPPs also have some capacity for AR wet or dry storage. Some countries also have small stores for SNF from 
research reactors or combine the storage of research reactor SNF with the storage of reprocessing waste (e.g. 
HABOG in the Netherlands). 

EN 

39 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
country 

facility/site 

facility type19 

United 
Kingdom 

Sellafield and 
NPPs 

pool 

period of 
operation 

–Since 
1950 

comments 

Table M: 

The Joint Convention – ratification status 

country 

date of signature 

date of ratification, 
acceptance or approval 

date of entry into force 

Austria 

Belgium 

Bulgaria 

Cyprus 

Czech Rep. 

Denmark 

Estonia 

Finland 

France 

Germany 

Greece 

Hungary 

Ireland 

Italy 

Latvia 

Lithuania 

Luxembourg 

Malta 

The Netherlands 

Poland 

Portugal 

Romania 

Slovakia 

Slovenia 

Spain 

Sweden 

United Kingdom 

Euratom 

17/09/98 

08/12/97 

22/09/98 

- 

30/09/97 

09/02/98 

05/01/01 

02/10/97 

29/09/97 

01/10/97 

09/02/98 

29/09/97 

01/10/97 

26/01/98 

27/03/00 

30/09/97 

01/10/97 

- 

10/03/99 

03/10/97 

- 

30/09/97 

30/09/97 

29/09/97 

30/06/98 

29/09/97 

29/09/97 

- 

13/06/01 

05/09/02 

21/06/00 

- 

25/03/99 

03/09/99 

03/02/06 

10/02/00 

27/04/00 

13/10/98 

18/07/00 

02/06/98 

20/03/01 

08/02/06 

27/03/00 

16/03/04 

21/08/01 

- 

26/04/00 

05/05/00 

- 

06/09/99 

06/10/98 

25/02/99 

11/05/99 

29/07/99 

12/03/01 

04/10/05 

11/09/01 

04/12/02 

18/06/01 

- 

18/06/01 

18/06/01 

04/05/06 

18/06/01 

18/06/01 

18/06/01 

18/06/01 

18/06/01 

18/06/01 

09/05/06 

18/06/01 

14/06/04 

19/11/01 

- 

18/06/01 

18/06/01 

- 

18/06/01 

18/06/01 

18/06/01 

18/06/01 

18/06/01 

18/06/01 

02/01/06 

EN 

40 

   EN 

 
 
 
Abbreviations and Acronyms 

AECL 

AFR 

AGR 

AkEnd 

Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. http://www.aecl.ca/ 

“away from reactor” (storage) 

advanced gas-cooled reactor 

Arbeitskreis Auswahlverfahren Endlagerstandorte (Germany) 
http://www.akend.de/ 

A.L.A.R.A. 

“As Low As Reasonably Achievable” – also the name of the Estonian 
Radioactive Waste Management Agency http://www.alara.ee/ 

ANDRA 

ANDRAD 

APAT 

AR 

ARAO 

ARIUS 

AVR 

BAPA 

BfS 

BLG 

BMU 

BNFL 

BWR 

BZA 

Agence Nationale pour la Gestion des Déchets Radioactifs (France) 
http://www.andra.fr/ 

Agentia Nationala pentru Deseuri Radioactive (Romanian National Agency for 
Radioactive Waste) http://www.andrad.ro/ 

L'Agenzia per la protezione dell'ambiente e per i servizi tecnici (Italian 
Regulator) http://www.apat.gov.it/ 

“at reactor” (storage) 

Agencija  za 
Management) http://www.gov.si/arao/ 

radioaktivne  odpadke 

(Slovenian  Agency 

for  Radwaste 

Association for Regional and International Underground Storage 
http://www.arius-world.org 

Arbeitsgemeinschaft Versuchs Reaktor GmbH ( German test reactor at Jülich) 

Bīstamo atkritumu pārvaldības valsts aģentūra (Latvian State Hazardous Waste 
Management Agency) http://www.bapa.gov.lv/  

Bundesamt für Strahlenschutz (Germany) http://www.bfs.de/ 

Brennelementlager (Gorleben) 

Das Bundesministerium für Umwelt, Naturschutz und Reaktorsicherheit 
(Germany) http://www.bmu.de/ 

British Nuclear Fuels Limited (now BNF plc) http://www.bnfl.com/ 

boiling water reactor 

Brennelement-Zwischenlager (Ahaus) 

CANDU 

Canadian Deuterium Uranium (Canadian heavy water reactor design) 

CEA 

CILVA 

CLAB 

CNCAN 

Commissariat à l’énergie atomique (France) http://www.cea.fr/ 

Centrale infrastructuur voor de verwerking van laagactief vast afval (Belgium) 

Centralt Lager för Använt Kärnbränsle (Swedish interim storage facility for 
spent fuel) 

Comisia Nationalã pentru Controlul Activitãtilor Nucleare (National 
Commission for Nuclear Activities Control - Romanian nuclear safety 
authority) 

COGEMA 

Compagnie Générale des Matières Nucléaires http://www.cogema.com/ 

COVRA  

Centrale Organisatie voor Radioactief Afval (Dutch Central Organization for 
Radioactive waste) http://www.covra.nl/ 

CSN 

Consejo de Seguridad Nuclear (Spain) http://www.csn.es/ 

EN 

41 

   EN 

 
DBE 

DD 

DEFRA 

DFR 

DG 

DG-RTD 

DGSNR 

DPRSN 

EA 

ENEA 

Deutsche Gesellschaft zum Bau und Betrieb von Endlagern für Abfallstoffe 
mbH (Germany) http://www.dbe.de/ 

Danish Decommissioning http://www.ddcom.dk/  

Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (UK) 
http://www.defra.gov.uk 

demonstration fast reactor 

Directorate-General (of the European Commission) 

Directorate-General for Research and Technological Development (European 
Commission) http://europa.eu.int/comm/research/energy/index_en.html 

Direction générale de la sûreté nucléaire et de la radioprotection (France) 
http://asn.gouv.fr/ 

Department of Radiological Protection and Nuclear Safety (Portugal) 
http://www.itn.pt/sec/prsn/uk_dprsn_pse.htm 

Environment Agency (UK) http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/ 

Ente per le Nuove Tecnologie, l’Energia e l’Ambiente (Italy) 
http://www.enea.it/ 

ENEL 

Ente Nazionale per l’Energia Elettrica (Italy) http://www.enel.it/ 

ENRESA 

Empresa Nacional de Residuos Radiactivos SA (Spanish WMO) 
http://www.enresa.es/ 

ERPC 

Estonian Radiation Protection Centre http://www.envir.ee/kiirgus/index.php 

EURIDICE 

European Underground Research infrastructure for disposal of radioactive waste 
in a Clay Environment http://www.euridice.be/ 

FANC / 
AFCN 

GAEC 

GWe 

HABOG 

HADES 

Federaal Agentschap voor Nucleaire Controle / L’Agence fédérale de Contrôle 
nucléaire (Belgium) http://www.fanc.fgov.be/newfanc/default.htm 

Greek Atomic Energy Commission 

Gigawatt electrical (unit of electrical power) 

Hoogradioactief Afval Behandelings- en Opslag Gebouw (Netherlands) 

High Activity Disposal Experimental Site (situated on SCK-CEN site at Mol, 
Belgium) 

HAEA 

Hungarian Atomic Energy Authority http://www.haea.gov.hu/ 

HEU 

HLW 

HRL 

HSE 

IAEA 

IFIN-HH 

INRNE 

JAVYS 

High Enriched Uranium 

high-level waste 

Hard Rock Laboratory (Äspö, Sweden) 

Health and Safety Executive (UK) http://www.hse.gov.uk/ 

International Atomic Energy Agency http://www.iaea.org/worldatom/ and in 
particular http://www.iaea.org/databases/dbdir/db97.htm 

Institutul National de Fizica si Inginerie Nucleara- "Horia Hulubei" (Romania) 
http://venus.nipne.ro/maggi/ifin-hh.php 

Institute of Nuclear Research and Nuclear Engineering of the Bulgarian 
Academy of Sciences http://www.inrne.bas.bg/ 

Jadrová a vyraďovacia společnost (Slovakian Nuclear Decommissioning 
Company) http://www.javys.sk  

EN 

42 

   EN 

 
KFD 

LILW 

LWR 
m3 

Kernfysische Dienst (Dutch regulator within Ministry of Environment) 

low- and intermediate-level waste (-SL short-lived, -LL long-lived) 

light-water reactor (i.e. PWR and / or BWR) 

cubic metre 

Magnox 

graphite moderated gas-cooled reactor (from magnesium oxide cladding) 

MACSTOR 

Modular Air Cooled Storage 

MITYC 

Ministerio de Industria Turismo y Comercio (Spain) http://www.mineco.es/ 

MOX 

MS 

NAEA 

NDA 

NEA 

NES 

NII 

mixed oxide (fuel) 

Member States (of the European Union) 

National Atomic Energy Agency (see PAA) 

Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (UK) http://www.nda.gov.uk/ 

Nuclear Energy Agency (of OECD – Organisation for Economic Co-operation 
and Development) http://www.nea.fr/ and in particular 
http://www.nea.fr/html/rwm/rf/welcome.html 

Nuclear Engineering Seibersdorf GmbH (Austria) 
http://www.nuclear-engineering.at/  

Nuclear Installations Inspectorate (part of HSE) 
http://www.hse.gov.uk/nsd/index.htm 

NORM 

Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material 

NPP 

NRA 

NCSR 
Demokritos 

nuclear power plant 

Nuclear Regulatory Agency (Bulgaria) http://www.bnra.bg/  

National Centre of Scientific Research "Demokritos" (Greece) 

OKG 

Oskarshamnskraftgrupp AB (Swedish NPP Company) http://www.okg.se/ 

ONDRAF / 
NIRAS 

Organisme National des Déchets Radioactifs et des Matières Fissiles / Nationale 
Instelling voor het Beheer van Radioactief Afval en Splijtstoffen (Belgium 
WMO) http://www.nirond.be/ 

P & T 

PAA 

PFR 

partitioning and transmutation 

Państwowa Agencja Atomistyki (Poland) http://www.paa.gov.pl/ 

prototype fast reactor 

POSIVA 

(Finnish WMO) http://www.posiva.fi/ 

PRACLAY 

Preliminary demonstration test for Clay disposal of highly radioactive waste 

PURAM 

PWR 

R&D 

RATA 

Public Agency for Radioactive Waste Management (Hungaria) 
http://www.rhk.hu/index.htm 

pressurised water reactor 

research and development 

Radioaktyviųjų atliekų tvarkymo agentūra (Lithuanian State Enterprise 
Radioactive Waste Management Agency) http://www.rata.lt/ 

RAWRA 

Radioactive Waste Repository Authority (see SÚRAO) 

RBMK 

(Russian designed graphite moderated pressure tube reactor) 

EN 

43 

   EN 

 
RDC /RSC 

Radiācijas 
drošības 
http://www.rdc.gov.lv/ 

centrs 

(Latvian 

Radiation 

Safety 

Centre) 

RSC 

Radiacinės saugos centras / Radiation Protection Centre (Lithuania) 
http://www.rsc.lt/ 

RWMP 

Radioactive Waste Management Plant (Poland) 

SCK-CEN 

Studiecentrum voor Kernenergie / Centre d’Etudes de l’Energie Nucléaire 
(Belgium nuclear research centre) http://www.sckcen.be/ 

SEPA 

Scottish Environment Protection Agency http://www.sepa.org.uk/ 

SERAW 

State Enterprise "Radioactive Waste" (Bulgaria) http://www.dprao.bg  

SE-VYZ o.z. 

Slovenské  elektrárne,  a.s.  -  Vyraďovanie  jadrovoenergetických  zariadení, 
(Slovak  WMO) 
zaobchádzanie  s  RAO  a  vyhoreným  palivom,  o.z. 
http://www.seas.sk/index.php?id=201 

SFR 

SFuDD 

SKB 

SF 

SOGIN 

SSM 

SSRS 

STUK 

SÚJB 

SÚRAO 

Te HM 

THTR 

ÚJD SR 

URL 

URSJV 

VATESI 

VLJ 

VLLW 

VROM 

Slutförvaret för radioaktivt driftavfall (Swedish final repository for radioactive 
waste, Forsmark) 

spent fuel destined for direct disposal 

Svensk Kärnbränslehantering AB (Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste 
Management Co) http://www.skb.se/ 

spent fuel 

Società Gestione Impianti Nucleari (Italian Decommissioning and Waste 
Management Company) http://www.sogin.it/  

Strålsäkerhetsmyndigheten (Swedish Radiation Safety Authority) 
http://www.stralsakerhetsmyndigheten.se 

spent sealed radioactive source 

Säteilyturvakeskus (Finnish radiation and nuclear safety authority) 
http://www.stuk.fi/ 

Státní  úřad  pro 
http://www.sujb.cz/ 

jadernou  bezpečnost  (Czech  nuclear  safety  authority) 

Správa  úložišť  radioaktivních  odpadů  (Czech  Radioactive  Waste  Repository 
Authority ) http://www.surao.cz/ 

tonnes heavy metal (equivalent to tonnes of uranium + plutonium) 

Thorium Hochtemperatur-Reaktor (at Hamm-Uentrop in Germany) 

Úrad jadrového dozoru Slovenskej republiky (Nuclear Regulatory Authority of 
the Slovak Republic) http://www.ujd.gov.sk/ 

underground research laboratory 

Uprava Republike Slovenije za jedrsko varnost (Slovenian Nuclear Safety 
Administration) http://www.sigov.si/ursjv/ 

Valstybinė Atominės Energetikos Saugos Inspekcija (Lithuanian nuclear safety 
authority) http://www.vatesi.lt/ 

Voimalaitosjäte (Finnish – nuclear power plant operational waste) 

very low-level waste 

De Raad voor de Volkshuisvesting, de Ruimtelijke Ordening en het 
Milieubeheer (Netherlands) http://www.vrom.nl/ 

EN 

44 

   EN 

 
VVER 

WMO 

ZAB 

ZLN 

Russian designed pressurised water reactor 

(radioactive) waste management organisation 

Zwischenlager für abgebrannte Brennstäbe (Greifswald) 

Zentrallager Nord (Greifswald) 

EN 

45 

   EN