5 Management of spent nuclear fuel and
radioactive waste
| (32136)
15770/10
COM(10) 618
+ ADDs 1-2
| Draft Council Directive on the management of spent fuel and radioactive waste
|
| Legal base | Articles 31 and 32 Euratom; consultation; QMV
|
| Document originated | 3 November 2010
|
| Deposited in Parliament | 5 November 2010
|
| Department | Energy & Climate Change
|
| Basis of consideration | EM of 18 November 2010
|
| Previous Committee Report | None, but see footnotes
|
| To be discussed in Council | No date set
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Not cleared; further information awaited
|
Background
5.1 In January 2003, the Commission produced two legislative proposals
on nuclear safety, one[31]
concerned with the safety of nuclear installations, and the other[32]
with the management of spent nuclear fuel and radioactive waste.[33]
In the latter case, it highlighted the broad international consensus
that disposal of the more hazardous High Level Waste by isolation
for extremely long periods of time, deep in stable geological
formations, is the most suitable option, and the delay in a number
of Member States in identifying and authorising suitable sites,
resulting in increasing quantities of spent nuclear fuel and waste
being held in interim storage at or near the surface.
5.2 It therefore proposed that Member States should develop appropriate
strategies and programmes for the long-term management of all
their waste types, with the emphasis on the development of repositories
for deep disposal, and it set out a number of obligations which
they would have to meet. In particular, they would be required
to establish a definite timetable for each step of the disposal
process.
5.3 The then Government's view was that a convincing
case had not yet been made for Community (rather than Member State)
action, and that the proposal would represent a major extension
of the Commission's nuclear legislative framework, which was not
consistent with the subsidiarity provisions within the Euratom
Treaty. It also drew attention to the reservations expressed by
the UK and some other Member States over the legal base proposed
by the Commission, as well as major practical difficulties in
relation to the review being undertaken of the UK's radioactive
waste management policy, where there was no presumption in favour
of any particular disposal option. Concern was also expressed
at the very considerable costs (in the region of £10 billion)
involved in the construction of a deep disposal facility.
5.4 Since a difference of view existed between those
Member States which favoured a Directive and those — including
the UK — which were arguing for a non-legally binding Council
Resolution, draft Council Conclusions were drawn up, reflecting
the commitment of all Member States to the safe management of
radioactive waste, and the need for extensive consultations. However,
it seemed unlikely that the Commission would make any new proposal
for binding legislation, at least in the short to medium term.
5.5 Despite this, the Commission put forward in September
2004 an amended proposal.[34]
This purported to have taken on board views expressed by the European
Parliament and the Council, but — although less prescriptive
— it still contained many of the features of the original
proposal, and in particular would have required Member States
to develop clearly-defined programmes, and to study the possibility
of deep disposal. The Government remained opposed to such a measure,
and a previous Committee reported these developments to the House
on 27 October 2004, when it asked to be kept informed of any further
developments, whilst holding the document (and the earlier proposal)
under scrutiny in the meantime.
The current proposal
5.6 The EU has since adopted the Nuclear Safety Directive[35]
(2009/71/Euratom), establishing a framework for the safety of
nuclear installations, but this covers only storage facilities
which are on the same site and directly related to the installation,
and, following a request from the Council, the Commission has
now put forward this further proposal which would address the
wider issues arising from the storage and management of spent
fuel and radioactive waste. In particular, it would seek to set
up of a EU framework to ensure the protection of workers and the
general public; implement the highest safety standards; avoid
imposing undue burdens on future generations; achieve a sustained
political commitment to the long term management of spent fuel
and radioactive waste; and ensure adequate and transparently managed
financial resources are available, in accordance with the "polluter
pays" principle.
5.7 In doing so, the Commission says that the European
Court of Justice has ruled that the Euratom Treaty confers upon
it powers of considerable scope in relation to health and safety,
enabling it to "supplement" existing basic safety standards,
and it argues that the issue of spent fuel and radioactive waste
management is clearly an area where the cross-border aspect of
safety makes it necessary for national legislation to be supplemented
at EU level. It also notes that, although the ultimate responsibility
in this area rests with Member States, it remains the case that
most have yet to take key decisions, especially in relation to
spent fuel and high level waste.
5.8 As regards the scope of the proposal, the Commission
notes that, although safety standards at international level have
been developed by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA),
these are not legally binding, and that there are no sanctions
for non-compliance with the provisions of the Joint Convention
on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive
Waste Management. Consequently, one aim of this proposal is to
make these internationally endorsed principles legally binding
and enforceable, and to lay down specific requirements for the
scope, contents and review of national programmes, applying these
to all stages of the management from the generation of waste to
its disposal. The proposal would not, however, apply to waste
from military and defence programmes, or to areas covered by other
EU legislation (such as the early exchange of information in the
event of an emergency, the control of high-activity sealed radioactive
sources and orphan sources, the management of waste from extractive
industries, and the supervision and control of shipments of radioactive
waste and spent fuel).
5.9 In particular, the proposal would require Member
States:
- to establish national policies
which ensure that the generation of radioactive waste is kept
to the minimum practicable in terms of both activity and volume
by suitable operating and decommissioning practices, including
recycling and reuse, that no undue burdens are imposed on future
generations, that spent fuel and radioactive waste are safely
managed, including in the long run, and that waste should be disposed
of in the Member State where it is generated, unless it is agreed
that disposal facilities in another Member State will be used;
- to establish a national framework which allocates
responsibilities and provides for coordination between relevant
state bodies, and which includes a system for the licensing of
activities and facilities, a system of appropriate institutional
control, inspection, documentation and reporting, and enforcement
actions (including suspension of activities and licence revocation);
- to establish a regulatory competent authority,
which is functionally separate from any other body concerned with
nuclear energy or radioactive material, and has the legal powers
and resources needed to fulfil its obligations;
- to ensure that the prime responsibility rests
with licence holders, who must regularly assess and improve the
safety of their activities, and put in place measures to prevent
accidents and mitigate their consequences, as well as maintaining
adequate financial and human resources; and
- to ensure that information on the management
of spent fuel and radioactive wastes is made available to workers
and the general public;
- to establish and implement programmes for the
management of all stages of spent fuel and radioactive waste under
their jurisdiction, from generation to disposal.
5.10 The proposal would also specify the contents
of national programmes, such as the need for an inventory of all
spent fuel and radioactive waste, including that from future decommissioning;
an indication of the location and amount of material and the level
of hazard involved; plans for the post-closure period of a nuclear
facility; major milestones, clear timeframes, and responsibilities
for implementation; key performance indicators; an assessment
of programme costs; and a description of the financing schemes
in force to ensure that costs under the schedule foreseen can
be met. Member States would also be required to notify the Commission
of their national programmes and of subsequent significant changes,
and to submit to it a report on the implementation of the Directive.
The Government's view
5.11 In his Explanatory Memorandum of 18 November
2010, the Minister of State at the Department for Energy &
Climate Change (Mr Charles Hendry) says that, whilst the draft
proposal is an improvement on earlier versions, there are a number
of issues which need to be resolved.
5.12 He suggests that the main concern is the emphasis
which the draft Directive places on high-level waste, which does
not adequately recognise the different management options that
have been (or could be) adopted for intermediate-level and low-level
waste. In addition, the Commission has argued that the storage
of spent fuel and radioactive waste (including long-term storage
at or near surface) is an interim solution only and not a true
alternative to disposal, which the Minister says is a fundamental
issue for the Scottish Government, as it goes against its policy
of managing higher activity waste in long-term near surface, near
site, storage or disposal facilities so that it can be monitored,
is retrievable, and does not have to be transported over long
distances. The Minister adds that the proposal is also not in
line with UK low-level waste policy, which recognises incineration,
landfill and decay storage as viable and important options for
the management of some types of waste, and he says that his department
is currently agreeing a cross-government position, aimed at ensuring
that any binding instrument is non-prescriptive.
5.13 The Minister also expresses concern that significant
waste arising from military and defence programmes could be be
caught by the proposed Directive. He points out that, where this
is not managed within civilian activities, it is excluded from
the Euratom Treaty, and that, although such an exclusion is implied
in the draft proposal, the UK is seeking to ensure that radioactive
material originating from these programmes and clearly separated
from civilian waste is explicitly excluded.
5.14 The Minister goes on to point out that there
is currently nothing within the UK regulating framework that requires
a National Programme, although domestic and international obligations
mean that it already has some elements of a Programme in place.
He says that an Impact Assessment on the potential additional
burden for Government and businesses arising from the draft proposal
is currently being developed in consultation with the devolved
administrations and with health and safety and environmental regulators.
He also notes that the draft requires Member States to have a
national framework in place guaranteeing that adequate financial
resources are available, and that the Government is currently
considering this requirement, particularly as the draft proposal
applies to radioactive waste from both the nuclear and non-nuclear
sectors.
Conclusion
5.15 Although this proposal appears to be less
prescriptive than those previously put forward by the Commission,
it is clear that it contains a number of elements which could
still create difficulties for (and within) the UK. In view of
this, and the evident political importance of the subject it is
addressing, we think it likely that we will wish to recommend
the document for debate in European Committee, but, as the Government
has said that it will be providing an Impact Assessment, we propose
to defer a decision on its future handling until we have received
that. In the meantime, we are drawing the document to the attention
of the House.
31 (24507) 8990/03: see HC 63-xxix (2002-03), chapter
8 (10 July 2003), HC 42-iii (2003-04), chapter 3 (17 December
2003) and HC 42-xxii (2003-04), chapter 4 (16 June 2004). Back
32
(24704) 8990/03: see HC 63-xxix (2002-03), chapter 4 (10 July
2003) and HC 42-xxii (2003-04), chapter 6 (9 June 2004). Back
33
So-called Low and Intermediate Level Waste is generated by a range
of applications in medicine, industry, agriculture, research and
education, and by electricity production in nuclear power plants,
whilst the latter also generates High Level Waste in the form
of spent fuel. Back
34
(25999) 12386/04: see HC 42-xxxiv (2003-04), chapter 5 (27 October
2004). Back
35
OJ No. L.172, 2.7.2009, p.18. Back
|
