Responsible and Safe Management of Spent Fuel and Radioactive Waste in the European Union

1.  Responsible and Safe Management of Spent Fuel and Radioactive Waste in the European Union Council Directive 2011/70/Euratom Adopted on 19 July 2011 Ute Blohm-Hieber European Commission, Head of Unit DG ENER-D.2

2. Art. 1 Subject matter • Community framework ensuring responsible and safe management of SF and RW to avoid imposing undue burden on the future generations • National arrangements for a high level of safety to protect workers and the general public against dangers arising from ionising radiation • Ensuring necessary public information and participation

3. Context • Each Member State remains free to define its fuel cycle policy: Spent fuel can be regarded either as a valuable resource that may be reprocessed or as radioactive waste that is destined for direct disposal. Whatever option is chosen, the disposal of high-level waste, separated at reprocessing, or of spent fuel regarded as waste should be considered. Storage of radioactive waste, including long-term storage, is an interim solution, but not an alternative to disposal.

4. Structure CHAPTER I – Scope, Definitions and General Principles CHAPTER II– Obligations • National framework (Art 5) • Competent regulatory authority (Art 6) • Licence holders (Art 7) • Expertise and skills (Art 8) • Financial resources (Art 9) • Transparency (Art 10) • National programmes (Art 11, 12, 13) • Reporting (Art 14) CHAPTER III– Final Provisions: Reporting & Transposition

5. « Directive in a Nutshell » • Euratom Treaty Chapt III supplementing BSS Directive (Art 1.4) • Civilian Spent Fuel & Radioactive Waste all stages of management from generation to disposal (Art 2) • Based on IAEA Safety Standards and Joint Convention • Internationally endorsed principles and requirements for SF and RW management – not legally binding and enforceable • definitions consistent with IAEA glossary – JC (Art 3) • National Programme: Heart of Directive

6. Provisions of DIR to progress towards disposal • RAW management from generation toDISPOSAL (Art 2.1) • SF & RAW to be safely managed in the long term withpassivesafety features (Art 4.3c) • Disposal outside EU only under very restricted conditions (safe disposal facility in operation) (Art 4.4) • Obligation of licence holder for comprehensive safety case including closure & post-closure of disposal facility (Art 7.3) • Adequate financial resources for the complete national programme (Art 9) including disposal • Notification of national programme (Art 12) for Commission(Art 13) opinion • Periodicpeer review(< 10 years) on national framework, regulatory body &implementation of national programme

7. National programme as heart of the DIR Art.12 Contents • Overall objectives of the national policy • Significant milestones and clear timeframes • Inventory - present amounts and future prospects • Concepts or plans and technical solutions • Concepts or plans for post-closure period of a disposal facility • Research, development and demonstration needed • Responsibilities and the key performance indicators • Cost assessment and financial scheme(s) in force • Transparency policy or process • Agreement(s) with a MS or a third country on SF and RW management, incl. on the use of disposal facility

8. Reporting & Transposition Art.14 Reporting • MS reports every three years – taking advantage of the review and reporting under the Joint Convention First reports by 23 August 2015 • Commission report to the Council and the European Parliament on progress made, inventory of SF and RW and future prospects • International peer review - invited by the MS at least every 10 years Art.15 Transposition • Compliance with the Directive by 23 August 2013 • First notification of the content of National Programmes not later than 23 August 2015

9. Why to act now? Why detailed National Programme needed? Why to plan disposal today? • Easier knowledge preservation, trained staff availability • Passive safety features of disposal: lower radiation exposure of workers (storage require active long-term monitoring) • To avoid undue burden on future generation (financial, managerial, knowledge, staff, …) <=> disposal: added value in safety vis-à-vis storage

10. Example: time frame for the implementation plan in Finland (Olkiluoto) • 1977 Feasibility investigations • 1983 Government decision about schedule and goals • 2000 Site confirmation • 2001 Decision in principle by government and parliament • 2001 Construction of ONKALO demonstration project June 2011: excavation of first demo tunnel • 2012 Construction license application • 2018 Operation license application • 2020 Commissioning Onkalo project

11. Recital 24 It is “an ethical obligation of each Member State to avoid any undue burden on future generations in respect of spent fuel and radioactive waste including any radioactive waste expected from decommissioning of existing nuclear installations. Through the implementation of this Directive Member States will have demonstrated that they have taken reasonable steps to ensure that that objective is met”

12. Conclusion Common Drivers towards disposal • National Programme • Reporting / Notification • Peer Review

13. Who fails toplan, plans to fail! THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION Ute.Blohm-hieber@ec.europa.eu