- Draft proposal for a Council Regulation establishing a Community system for Registration of carriers of radioactive materials - Proposal for a Council Regulation on Union support for the nuclear decommissioning assistance programmes in Bulgaria, Lithuania and Slovakia - Proposal for a Council Directive laying down the requirements for the protection of the health of the general public with regard to radioactive substances in water intended for human consumption - Proposal for a Council Directive laying down basic safety standards for the protection of the health of workers and the general public against the dangers arising from ionising radiation - Hoofdinhoud

Inhoudsopgave van deze pagina:

Delen

1. Tekst
2. Originele weergave

3. Meer informatie

COU CIL OFBrussels, 21 December 2011

THE EUROPEA U IO

18780/11

-

ATO 164

E V 990 -

OUTCOME OF PROCEEDI GS

from: Working Party on Atomic Questions

on 14 December 2011

Subject: - Draft proposal for a Council Regulation establishing a Community system for Registration of carriers of radioactive materials

• - 

  Proposal for a Council Regulation on Union support for the nuclear decommissioning assistance programmes in Bulgaria, Lithuania and Slovakia
• - 

  Proposal for a Council Directive laying down the requirements for the protection of the health of the general public with regard to radioactive substances in water intended for human consumption
• - 

  Proposal for a Council Directive laying down basic safety standards for the protection of the health of workers and the general public against the dangers arising from ionising radiation
• 1. 

  Draft proposal for a Council Regulation establishing a Community system for Registration of carriers of radioactive materials

• - 

  Presentation by the Commission

doc. 13684/11 ATO 98 ENV 655 TRANS 228

The Presidency recalled that on 2 September 2011 delegations received this draft proposal (doc. 13684/11), which is first subject to the opinion of the ECOSOC before the Commission can make an official proposal to the Council. Afterwards, the Council will have to ask the European Parliament's opinion before it can adopt this Council Directive.

The Commission's representative informed that the ECOSOC opinion is expected in February 2011 and a formal proposal from the Commission to the WPAQ could be expected in March/April 2012.

The Commission presented the contents of the proposed Regulation:

• - 

  Centralised implementation of Art. 3 and Art. 4 of the Council Directive 96/29/Euratom for carriers of radioactive materials;
• - 

  A single registration, reviewed by respective national competent authority, allowing for transports across the EU during five years, renewable;
• - 

  European System for Carrier Registration providing, among others, a good overview to competent authorities;
• - 

  Graded approach;
• - 

  National contact points;
• - 

  Other Community law and international rules regarding physical protection, safeguards,

and third-part-liability continue to apply. UK/DE/BE entered a scrutiny reserve on the proposal.

FR/UK invited to provide further justification why a Regulation and not a Directive is proposed. The Commission's representative noted that a Regulation is needed to have one clear system of registration.

CZ expressed reservation on the proposed double track approach in Art. 3 and would expect a single unified EU system.

In reply to NL, the Commission's representative noted that the figure refers to expected benefits from the implementation of the proposed Regulation.

SE welcomed the proposal and pointed some preliminary considerations to be addressed:

• - 

  in Art. 3(4) an exemption to an exemption is foreseen;
• - 

  in Art. 5(10) would prefer to first require additional information before refusing to issue a

certificate;

• - 

  Art. 9 does not provide complete requirements, as would be expected in a Regulation;

beside appropriateness of competences foreseen for national regulators in implementing this Regulation should be further clarified. Legal Service of the Council noted that the language of Article 9 should be further clarified and/or adjusted to be compatible with legal requirements set for a regulation.

ES invited to clarify in Art. 1 whether carriers transporting radioactive materials by ships are excluded from this Regulation.

EI requested to clarify relationship of this proposal and the provisions of the Service Directive 2006/123/EC and whether that Directive would not be sufficient to cover the subject matter of this proposal.

The Commission noted that stakeholders welcomed this proposal and hoped that implementation of this Regulation will lead to reduction of rejected applications for carrying radioactive materials.

The Presidency invited the incoming Presidency to return to this proposal after the formal proposal is received.

2. Proposal for a Council Regulation on Union support for the nuclear decommissioning assistance programmes in Bulgaria, Lithuania and Slovakia

Presentation by the Commission and exchange of views

doc. 17752/11 ATO 149 CADREFIN 159 The Commission presented its proposal for a Council Regulation, which foresees an extension of financial support from the Union with the general objective to reach an irreversible state within the decommissioning process of Kozloduy units 1 to 4, Ignalina units 1 and 2 and Bohunice V1 units 1 and 2 nuclear power plants, in accordance with their respective decommissioning plans, while keeping the highest level of safety.

Key concerns raised by the recipient countries:

• - 

  Scope and duration of the assistance: BG, LT, and SK raised concern that the overall and individual share of the envelope significantly differ from the actual need that has to be met in order to successfully and safely continue the planned decommissioning work. SK asked to provide further clarification on the guidelines and methods of evaluation used for distribution of financial resources in the proposal.
• - 

  Objective of the Community assistance: BG, LT, and SK noted that reaching an irreversible state within the decommissioning process is not acceptable as an objective, also from the public perception point of view.
• - 

  Legal framework: LT has serious doubts about the compliance of the proposal with the provisions of Lithuania's Act of Accession and Protocol No 4 in particular.
• - 

  Ex ante conditionality: SK/BG noted that Art. 4(1)(b) requiring to provide adequate provisions for the timely accumulation of national financial resources is redundant as operators could not meet such requirements due to obligations for early closure of the plants. The Commission's representative provided preliminary comments on the above points:
• - 

  Total amount of the financial assistance falls within the scope of discussions in the Multiannual Financial Framework and cannot be addressed at the WPAQ group. The duration was set at 14 years from the accession of Member States to the EU in order to ensure an equal treatment of all three Member States. On the split of the envelope, commitments to BG were deducted first and the remaining amount was divided 2/3 vs. 1/3 for LT and SK.
• - 

  Justification for the EU value added is a part of requirements for an EU legislation. Projects leading to the irreversible state within the decommissioning process are estimated as providing the most value added at the EU level. While the continuation of decommissioning process to the completion is of paramount importance, it should fall within the national competence.
• - 

  One single instrument was proposed in line with the overall objective of simplifying the EU legal framework.

DE welcomed the proposal and the proposed structure for the future support for the nuclear decommissioning assistance.

FR acknowledged the efforts undertaken by the three recipient countries and noted the clarity of the proposal. FR recalled that ex-ante provisions for third countries should not be lower than within the EU and would welcome to consider such provisions also in the forthcoming proposal on the INSC instrument. FR also commented on the terminology, on committee procedure foreseen in Art. 9 and repeal clause in Art. 11.

AT noted that it is well aware of the enormous challenge undertaken in decommissioning work and the reasons for continued European solidarity in this effort, which AT will continue to fully support. AT invited to have clear definitions of the ex-ante conditions and a table providing further information per country and per year on financial support split between projects on safety and energy measures.

The Commission's representative pointed out that energy sectors are still eligible for assistance under the current financial framework and ensured that upon request it can provide further detail on funding overview.

In reply to BE, the Commission's representative noted that decommissioning funding needs differ among countries due to different reactor types and taking into account that while SK already had a spent fuel facility, LT and BG had them to build.

The Presidency invited delegations to provide written comments by 22 December. On this basis, the text could be discussed at a future WPAQ meeting.

3. Proposal for a Council Directive laying down the requirements for the protection of the health of the general public with regard to radioactive substances in water intended for human consumption

• - 

  Finalisation of the text with a view to preparing a political agreement doc. 13648/5/11 REV 5 ATO 96 ENV 651

The draft proposal (doc. 12491/11) was presented to the WPAQ at its meeting on 20 July. On 27 October 2011, the ECOSOC Committee adopted its opinion. An official Commission's proposal is expected in January 2012. Afterwards, the Council will have to ask the European Parliament's opinion before adopting this Directive. Vote in the plenary session of the European Parliament is expected in April 2012.

Based on the discussions at the AQG meeting on 30 November and written comments received, the Presidency has prepared a revised draft proposal (doc. 13648/5/11 REV 5), which was circulated to delegations on 8 December.

The Presidency recalled that the balance achieved in the latest draft between a level of ambition commensurate to the health issues addressed and the necessary flexibility required to implement the Directive in a cost-effective way taking into account national circumstances, e.g. geology.

Monitoring has to be done pursuant to Art. 4 to assess whether the quality of water is in compliance with the parametric values established in Annex I. For this purpose gross alpha or gross beta screening levels should be set. The recommended screening levels for gross alpha and for gross beta are 0.1 Bq/l and 1.0 Bq/l. However, Member States may set alternative screening levels for gross alpha and gross beta where they can demonstrate that the alternative levels are in compliance with the ID of 0.1 mSv.

Besides, as set out in Annex III, Member States may use various reliable screening methods to indicate the presence of radioactivity in water intended for human consumption. These methods may include screening for certain radionuclides, or screening for an individual radionuclide, or gross alpha activity or gross beta activity screening. Thus, the current text already gives a lot of flexibility regarding the choice of methods or screening levels as long as compliance is maintained with an Indicative Dose of 0.1 mSv.

In this respect, the Commission's representative further clarified that the Member States need to carry out a study analysing typical radionuclides demonstrating that the ID of 0.1 mSv is not exceeded with higher alpha screening levels and provide such a study to the Commission in a one-off notification when transposing this Directive into a national law.

The Commission can provide an opinion on the study, but does not have to authorise the national screening methods or screening levels. The Commission has sufficient instruments to make sure that the required ID value is not exceeded by a Member State and can organise a mission under Art. 35 of the Euratom Treaty to verify the situation.

The WPAQ agreed to introduce the following changes (to be reflected in a Corrigendum to

doc. 13648/5/11):

• - 

  Footnote 2 p. 16 is deleted.
• - 

  Throughout Annex III the term "methods" is replaced with "strategies".
• - 

  p. 17, the paragraph "Member States ...0.1 mSv" becomes the penultimate paragraph.
• - 

  p. 18, the word "adults" is deleted in the second line as well as in footnote 1.
• - 

  Annex B, the second sentence of the first Commission statement reads as:
• - 

  "Future amendments in Directive 98/83/EC that may also be relevant for the Directive under consideration will, where appropriate, be proposed by the Commission to be included in the Directive under consideration to avoid inconsistencies."
• - 

  Annex B, the Council statement is deleted.

The Presidency concluded that on that basis the WPAQ reached full agreement on the text as set out in doc. 13648/5/11 REV 5 + COR 1 and that Coreper will be invited to take note of this full agreement.

4. Proposal for a Council Directive laying down basic safety standards for the protection of the health of workers and the general public against the dangers arising from ionising radiation

• - 

  Exchange of views on issues linked to natural radiation, appearing in Chapter VI, VIII together with relevant annexes: NORM industries; Building material; Radon.

doc. 14450/11 ATO 112 SOC 791 SAN 183

DS 1739/11

An advanced presentation on draft proposal (doc. 14450/11) for a revision and consolidation of the Euratom Basic Safety Standards was made to the WPAQ at its meeting on 28 September.

Following the initial exchange of views, the Presidency presented a summary of the replies from the delegations on a Presidency's questionnaire and working method on the examination of the draft proposal, which were provided to the delegations in the note DS 1739/11 on 21 November.

The Presidency invited delegations to discuss more "technical" issues linked to natural radiation, appearing in Chapter VI, VIII, together with relevant annexes (NORM industries, building material, radon).

The Presidency recalled that most of the delegations were in favour of option 6, which includes NORM industry in the scope of the proposal.

The Presidency pointed out that workers can be exposed to radiation sources exceeding the set limits in various industries and recalled that the greatest risk in the residual buildings is attributable to radon.

UK/DE/ES/SE/BE entered scrutiny reserves on the whole text.

FR made the following points:

• - 

  have one single reference to radon for all buildings as it would be difficult to justify to the

public two different limits depending on the year of construction;

• - 

  Member States should support R&D to reach the level of 100 Bq m[[note: -3]] as advised by the WHO;
• - 

  have the same requirements in the NORM industry as in the nuclear industry;
• - 

  set out justification for the practice set in Art. 29(4);
• - 

  allow Member States to add/delete from the list of NORM activities set in Annex 5;
• - 

  for building materials need to use standardised CEN levels, which recommendation is expected in 2013, also need to work further with Art. 31 group of experts on this subject. Thus, transposition of this part of the Directive must be given more time.

UK made the following points:

• - 

  the principle of optimisation of dose limits referred to in Art. 53 need further clarification;
• - 

  maximum limits for indoor radon concentrations at 1 000 Bq m[[note: -3]] for workplaces might be too high;
• - 

  need consistency in requirements or justification of differences in the NORM and the nuclear industries;
• - 

  requirements for building materials might affect internal market and trade, which should

be avoided.

DE recalled its position in writing sent in on 18 October.

FI made preliminary comments pointing out that reference levels for indoor radon concentrations at 300 Bq m[[note: -3]] for existing dwellings should remain only recommended values, as it would be very difficult to achieve such conformity in Finland. Besides, public premises in Finland are regulated as work place and achieving 300 Bq m[[note: -3]] is very challenging. Indoor radon concentrations at 1 000 Bq m[[note: -3]] for work place are very high. However, in some cases, like work in tunnels, safe levels can even exceed that value as work in such environment is for a very short time periods. Thus, emphasis should be placed not on activity concentrations, but on the actual dose. FI could also support setting guidelines on building materials.

NL made a preliminary comment that reguirements for NORM, building materials and radon should be included in the scope of this Proposal.

ES noted its main concern regarding application of requirements for the NORM industry.

EE informed that it cannot economically meet the requirements for exposure to radon in dwellings.

BE would like to see radon handled as part of a long term policy and to use mSv as a measurement unit. BE would like to see a list of safety requirements set in the IAEA's Safety Report Series No.49, IAEA. BE pointed out that it might be not necessary to include reference to gamma radiation emitted by building materials.

The Commission's representative concluded that a lot of the issues raised by the delegations should be discussed at the expert group level.

The Commission agreed that the authorised work place exposure is rather high, but recalled that it is in line with the ICRP recommendations.

It was also pointed out that the use of Bq m[[note: -3]] for inhaled air is the only well established measurement unit. Besides, Annex 5 provides only an indicative NORM list and it is up to the Member States to decide what is to be included in that list.

5. Other business

• - 

  CPPNMNF ratification process: the Presidency informed that the EEAS is preparing for a joint deposit in Vienna and has already instructed the EU delegation in Vienna to make preparatory step. FR/IT informed that draft laws are at parliaments and should shortly be approved. CY informed that draft law is at the Council of Ministers and should be soon send for adoption to the parliament. IE reiterated that the responsible Ministry has preparation of this law as a priority action for the next year.
• - 

  Implementation of the Waste Management Directive: the Commission's representative informed that the Commission is planning to organise a seminar on 25-26 September 2012 in Brussels regarding transposition of this Directive into the national law and will follow up the ENSREG's work regarding format and guidelines under Art. 14, peer reviews and self assessments, and implementation of integrated management systems and the ENEF's risk group work on national programmes. Invitations to the event will be sent shortly through Permanent Representations of the Member States.
• - 

  7th Situation Report on Radwaste and Spent Fuel Management in the EU: the Commission's representative recalled that some technical comments were received from the Member States following presentation of this report to the WPAQ group on 7 September 2011. As promised, the Commission has prepared a summary report, which was sent to the concerned delegations for consent with a view to have this report posted on the Commission's webpage by the end of January 2012. The Commission's representative invited concerned delegations to note whether their positions are properly reflected in the summary report. Any other comments from the delegations are invited to be sent in by mid-January at the latest.
• - 

  HLLC meeting on 11 January 2012: the Presidency noted that DK and AT representatives expressed the wish to assist the Commission at the HLLC. FR expressed the wish to join the meeting as well.

* * *

The next WPAQ meetings will take place on 6 and 25 January.

________________________

• 13 jan '04
  COM(2004)2 - Diensten op de interne markt [SEC(2004) 21]
  
  
  
• 4 jan '95
  COM(1994)612 - Kwaliteit van voor menselijke consumptie bestemd water
  
  
  
• 20 jul '93
  COM(1993)349 - Basisnormen voor de bescherming van de gezondheid der bevolking en der werknemers tegen de aan ioniserende straling verbonden gevaren