COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT   Accompanying document to the   revised proposal for a COUNCIL DIRECTIVE (Euratom)  on the management of spent fuel and radioactive waste
Date: 2010-11-03
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: civil defence, environmental protection, irradiated fuel, nuclear research, nuclear safety, project evaluation, radiation protection, radioactive waste, underground storage of waste, waste management

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Brussels, 3.11.2010 
SEC(2010) 1290 final 

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 

SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT 

Accompanying document to the 

revised proposal for a COUNCIL DIRECTIVE (Euratom) 

on the management of spent fuel and radioactive waste  

COM(2010) 618 
SEC(2010) 1289 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 

SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT 

Accompanying document to the 

revised proposal for a COUNCIL DIRECTIVE (Euratom) 

on the management of spent fuel and radioactive waste  

1. 

INTRODUCTION 

This impact assessment accompanies a revised proposal for legislation on the management of 
spent fuel and radioactive waste in the European Union, included in the Commission’s work 
programme 2010. In the European Union, spent fuel and radioactive waste arising from civil 
nuclear activities are dealt with under the Euratom Treaty.  

In  2003,  the  Commission  proposed  a  Council  Directive  (Euratom)  dealing  with  the 
management of spent nuclear fuel and radioactive waste and, in 2004, submitted an amended 
proposal  to  the  Council.  After  lengthy  discussions,  the  Council  called  in  its  June  2004 
conclusions  on  Nuclear  Safety  and  Safe  Management  of  Spent  Fuel  and  Radioactive  Waste 
for ‘extensive consultation’ with stakeholders before proceeding with any legislation on this 
matter under the Euratom Treaty.  

The  Commission  therefore  undertook  extensive  consultation  through  different  EU-wide 
initiatives in response to the Council’s request. It consulted governments, national regulators, 
radioactive  waste  management  organisations,  radioactive  waste  producers  and  others  in  the 
Member  States.  Other  EU  institutions,  non-governmental  organisations  and  other  partners 
were also consulted. A detailed contribution made by the European Nuclear Safety Regulators 
Group  (ENSREG)  was  taken  into  account.  This  was  of  key  importance,  given  the  specific 
competence  of  ENSREG,  which  represents  national  authorities  competent  on  the  safety  of 
nuclear installations and of spent fuel and radioactive waste management, in Member States 
with and without nuclear power programmes. Special attention was given at the same time to 
the  societal  dimension 
including  dedicated 
Eurobarometer polls and an open public consultation. Radioactive waste is one of the major 
concerns of EU citizens. A large majority are in favour EU legislation. 

through  various  public  consultations, 

2. 

PROBLEM DEFINITION 

All Member States produce radioactive waste. Radioactive waste and spent fuel are generated 
in  many  beneficial  activities,  such  as  nuclear  power  production  and  a  range  of  radioisotope 
applications  in  medicine,  industry,  agriculture  and  research.  More  than  half  of  the  Member 
States have nuclear power plants in operation. There are nuclear reactors under construction 
and  under  decommissioning,  and  plans  for  new  builds.  Radioactive  waste,  including  spent 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
fuel  considered  as  waste,  requires  containment  and  isolation  from  humans  and  their  living 
environment for a very long time.  

Whatever  the  future  of  nuclear  power  and  non-power  applications,  the  ‘end  point’  of  the 
management  of  all  existing  and  future  radioactive  waste  must  be  disposal  in  appropriate 
facilities,  in  order  to  ensure  both  safety  and  sustainability.  This  obligation  cannot  be  left  to 
future  generations.  The  technical  consensus  world-wide  is  that  storage  of  spent  fuel  and 
radioactive waste, even long-term storage, is an interim  solution  requiring  permanent  active 
control.  It  does  not  represent  an  alternative  to  disposal,  with  its  inherent  passive  safety 
features.  

Despite this consensus and developments in the EU, the International Atomic Energy Agency 
(IAEA)  and  the  Nuclear  Energy  Agency,  key  decisions  on  managing  spent  fuel  and 
radioactive waste up to the end point are often still postponed. In many countries, this ‘wait-
and-see’ policy constitutes the main problem. To overcome this situation there is a need for 
political  commitment,  public  information  and  participation  in  decision  making,  as  well  as 
sufficient scientific, technical and financial resources. 

3. 

ANALYSIS OF SUBSIDIARITY 

The issue of spent fuel and radioactive waste management is clearly an area where national 
legislation  has  to  be  supplemented  by  EU  legislation  due  to  its  cross-border  aspect  of  the 
safety.  At  the  same  time,  the  internal  market  requires  the  Commission  to  ensure  a  level 
playing field to avoid distortion of competition. 

Existing EU legislation does not cover all activities and facilities related to the management 
of spent fuel and radioactive waste in the long term, neither aspects such as national policies 
and  their  implementation,  nor  public  information  and  participation  in  the  decision-making 
process.  As  a  consequence,  the  existing  instruments  at  EU  level  do  not  cover  this  field 
sufficiently. 

Following adoption of the Directive 2009/71/Euratom establishing a Community framework 
for the nuclear safety of nuclear installations with support by all 27 EU Member States and 
the  European  Parliament,  the  development  of  secondary  EU  legislation  on  spent  fuel  and 
radioactive waste management is the logical next step. 

The  Safety  Standards  developed  and  adopted  by  the  IAEA  in  collaboration  with  other 
organisations  are  not  legally  binding  and  their  incorporation  into  national  legislation  is 
voluntary. The Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety 
of  Radioactive  Waste  management,  made  under  the  auspices  of  the  IAEA,  is  the  most 
significant international Treaty in the field of spent fuel and radioactive waste management. 
All EU Member States (except Malta) and the Euratom Community are Contracting Parties. 
However, the Joint Convention does not entail any sanctions for non-compliance. This means 
in  summary,  that  the  internationally  accepted  principles  and  requirements,  laid  down  in  the 
IAEA Standards and the Joint Convention, do not guarantee a uniform approach at EU level 
due to missing enforceability. 

Thus,  at  present,  the  management  of  spent  fuel  and  radioactive  waste  remains  a  national 
responsibility. Further improvement is needed as to actions at national level in most Member 
States to ensure responsible management of spent fuel and radioactive waste.  

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
4. 

OBJECTIVES OF EU INITIATIVE 

The general policy objective is to set up a EU legal framework for the management of spent 
fuel  and  radioactive  waste  as  an  integral  part  of  the  safe  and  sustainable  use  of  the  nuclear 
energy  for  nuclear  power  production  and  of  the  ionising  radiation  in  medicine,  industry, 
agriculture, research and education. The specific objectives in respect of achieving the general 
policy objective are: 

–  to  ensure  that  workers  and  the  general  public  are  protected  against  dangers  arising  from 

ionizing radiation now, in the future and beyond national borders  

–  to  implement  the  highest  safety  standards  for  radioactive  waste  and  spent  fuel 

management; 

–  to avoid imposing undue burdens on future generations; 

–  to  achieve  sustained  political  commitment  for  the  management  of  spent  fuel  and 

radioactive waste in the long term; 

–  to ensure a transposition of the political decisions into clear provisions for implementation 
of all steps on radioactive waste and spent fuel management from generation to disposal; 

–  to  achieve  and  maintain  continuing  improvement  of  the  management  system,  based  on 

stepwise decision-taking and social acceptance. 

–  to ensure adequate, available when needed and transparently managed financial resources 

in accordance with the polluter-pays principle. 

5. 

POLICY OPTIONS 

Three policy options are analysed in detail. 

Policy option 0 consists in keeping the current situation unchanged (‘do-nothing’).  

Policy  option  1  consists  in  strengthening  at  EU  level  the  internationally  accepted 
principles and requirements for radioactive waste and spent fuel management, laid down 
in  the  Safety  Standards  of  the  International  Atomic  Energy  Agency  and  in  the  Joint 
Convention, by rendering them both legally binding and enforceable at EU level. 

This approach includes the establishment of: 

–  a  Community  framework  which  formulates  the  general  principles  governing  the 

management of spent fuel and radioactive waste in the EU; 

–  national  frameworks  for  spent  fuel  and  radioactive  waste  management  which  allocate 
responsibilities  and  provide  for  coordination  between  relevant  state  bodies  in  the  long 
term. 

Policy  option  2  goes  beyond  policy  option  1  by  establishing  in  addition  specific 
requirements  for  national  programmes  for  radioactive  waste  and  spent  fuel 
management in the Member States.  

These requirements include scope, contents and review of national programmes for spent fuel 
and radioactive waste management. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
6. 

ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS 

Policy  option  0  would  require  ever-increasing  efforts  for  ensuring  safety  and  knowledge 
preservation  with  time.  It  furthermore  would  entail  increasing  uncertainties  and  risks  as  to 
political commitments, financing, fading of know-how, social conflicts, etc possibly leading 
to disruptions in the safe operation of long-term storage facilities and the implementation of 
disposal.  Thus,  policy  option  0  involves  potential  negative  environmental,  economic  and 
social  impacts  with  time,  including  undue  burdens  on  future  generations  and  a  possible 
distortion of competition on the electricity market.  

Policy option 1 would contribute to achieving a uniform high level of safety of spent fuel and 
radioactive waste management at EU level in the short term. Therefore, it would have positive 
environmental,  economic  and  social  impacts  which,  however,  are  certain  only  for  the  short 
term.  It  could  not  guarantee  positive  impacts  in  the  long  term,  as  that  would  depend  on 
whether Member States timely plan and implement the disposal of their radioactive waste and 
spent fuel considered as waste.  

Policy  option  2  would  result  in  achieving  a  uniform  high  level  of  safety  of  spent  fuel  and 
radioactive waste management at EU level in the long term, without imposing undue burdens 
on  future  generations  and  compromising  the  ability  of  future  generations  to  meet  their  own 
needs. Only this option has positive long-term environmental, economic and social impacts. 

7. 

COMPARISON OF OPTIONS 

Policy option 0 would not improve the situation as to ‘wait-and-see’ policies. It is the view of 
all  Member  States,  the  European  institutions,  major  stakeholders  and  the  public  that  ‘do-
nothing’ is no valid option. 

Policy option 1 would contribute to improving the management of spent fuel and radioactive 
waste at EU level in the shorter term as it makes the internationally accepted principles and 
requirements  for  radioactive  waste  and  spent  fuel  management  legally  binding  and 
enforceable  at  EU  level.  However,  in  the  longer  term,  unjustified  prolongations  of  the 
decision-making process and interim long-term storage cannot be excluded under this policy 
option. Thus, this option does not guarantee the long-term safety of spent fuel and radioactive 
waste management. 

Only policy option 2 would guarantee the long-term safety, increase the transparency of the 
decision making process  and thus the  sustainable management of spent fuel and radioactive 
waste  management.  It  is  strongly  supported  by  the  stakeholders  and  the  public,  and  it 
complies in the utmost degree with the positions of the Council and the European Parliament. 

In the framework of the above considerations, policy option 2 appears to be the preferred one 
as  it  would  guarantee  the  achievement  of  the  general  policy  objective.  It  is  also  the  most 
effective option to avoid distortion of competition. 

8. 

MONITORING AND EVALUATION 

The indicators of progress towards meeting the political objective are: 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
–  status  of  implementing  the  requirements  for  establishing  a  national  framework  for  spent 
fuel  and  radioactive  waste  management  allocating  responsibilities  and  providing  for 
coordination between relevant state bodies in the long term, and 

–  status  of  implementing  the  requirements  for  scope,  contents  and  review  of  national 

programmes for spent fuel and radioactive waste management. 

Member States would report to the Commission on the implementation of these requirements, 
taking advantage of the review and reporting cycles under the Joint Convention. On the basis 
of  the  Member  States′  reports,  the  Commission  will  submit  a  report  to  the  Council  and  the 
European Parliament on progress made.  

Member  States  will  invite  an  international  peer  review  of  their  national  framework  and 
national  programme  with  the  aim  of  continuously  improving  the  management  of  spent  fuel 
and  radioactive  waste.  Outcomes  of  any  peer  review  will  be  reported  to  the  Member  States 
and the Commission. 

EN 

6 

   EN