EN EN

EUROPEAN COMMISSION

Brussels, 29.9.2026 COM(2026) 512 final

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN

PARLIAMENT

on progress of implementation of Council Directive 2011/70/EURATOM and an

inventory of radioactive waste and spent fuel present in the Community's territory and

the future prospects

FOURTH REPORT

{SWD(2026) 285 final} - {SWD(2026) 286 final}

2

1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 3

2 RADIOACTIVE WASTE AND SPENT FUEL IN THE EUROPEAN UNION ............... 4

2.1 Origin of radioactive waste and spent fuel ................................................................. 4

2.2 Inventory estimates ..................................................................................................... 4

3 SAFE AND RESPONSIBLE MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE AND

SPENT FUEL ...................................................................................................................... 5

3.1 National frameworks and programmes ...................................................................... 5

3.2 Competent authorities ................................................................................................. 6

3.3 Circularity and disposal policies ................................................................................ 6

3.4 Cost assessments and financing ................................................................................. 7

3.5 Programme monitoring and reporting ........................................................................ 7

3.6 Transparency and public participation ....................................................................... 7

4 CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................. 8

3

1 INTRODUCTION

Under Article 14(2) of Council Directive 2011/70/Euratom (1) on the responsible and safe

management of spent fuel (2) and radioactive waste (3) (‘the Directive’), the Commission has

to regularly submit the following to the European Parliament and Council:

• a report on progress made with the implementation of the Directive;

• an inventory of radioactive waste and spent fuel present in the European Atomic

Energy Community’s (‘the Community’) territory and the future prospects.

The information presented is based on Member States’ national reports, which are due every

three years as per Article 14(1) of the Directive; the last reporting deadline for Member States

was 23 August 2024. This fourth report covers the 2021-2023 period. The report is

accompanied by two staff working documents:

• one presenting the overall situation in the Community based on the Commission’s

analyses of the national reports;

• one presenting the Community’s inventory of radioactive waste and spent fuel and

future prospects, with a reference date of December 2023.

The Commission previously presented three progress reports – in 2017, 2019 and 2024, each

providing a comprehensive overview on the implementation of Directive. This report

describes few changes or developments compared with the situation presented in the 2024

report (4); therefore, most of Commission’s conclusions remain valid. In 2025, the

Commission launched the evaluation of the Directive, along with the evaluation of Council

Directive 2006/117/Euratom on the supervision and control of shipments of radioactive waste

and spent fuel (5).

Section 2 provides an overview of radioactive waste and spent fuel inventories in the

Community. Section 3 summarises the assessment of the current state of implementation of

national frameworks and programmes under the Directive, highlighting recent progress and

unresolved challenges.

(1) Council Directive 2011/70/Euratom of 19 July 2011 establishing a Community framework for the responsible and safe management

of spent fuel and radioactive waste (OJ L 199, 2.8.2011, p. 48, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2011/70/oj). (2) Spent fuel is ‘nuclear fuel that has been irradiated in and permanently removed from a reactor core’ (Article 3(11) of the Directive)

and that is no longer usable in its current form. It is generated by the operation of nuclear reactors for power generation, research,

training and demonstration. (3) Radioactive waste is ‘radioactive material in gaseous, liquid or solid form for which no further use is foreseen or considered’

(Article 3(7) of the Directive) and which has been classified as radioactive waste. Its generation is associated with the production of

electricity in nuclear power plants or with non-power-related uses of radioactive materials for medical, research, industrial and agricultural purposes. See SWD(2026) 286 on progress on implementation of Council Directive 2011/70/Euratom for the definitions

of others important concepts set out in the Directive, such as storage and disposal. (4) Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on progress of implementation of Council Directive

2011/70/EURATOM and an inventory of radioactive waste and spent fuel present in the Community’s territory and the future prospects, Third Report, https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/documents-register/detail?ref=COM(2024)197&lang=en

(5) This evaluation process involved also Call for Evidence and Public Consultation (2026): https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-

regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/14619-Radioactive-Waste-Directive-and-Shipments-Directive-evaluation_en

4

2 RADIOACTIVE WASTE AND SPENT FUEL IN THE EUROPEAN UNION

2.1 Origin of radioactive waste and spent fuel

All Member States generate radioactive waste through a range of activities, from medical

applications to electricity generation. Most radioactive waste comes from nuclear power

plants and associated nuclear fuel cycle activities, while the non-power use of radioactive

materials generates smaller volumes of radioactive waste.

Each Member State determines its own electricity generation mix. In 2023, nuclear power

plants were in operation in 12 countries (6). Three others – Germany, Italy and Lithuania –

had ended their nuclear power programmes and were decommissioning their nuclear

installations.

In 2023, 101 nuclear power reactors were in operation (7), 74 nuclear power reactors had been

permanently shut down and were being decommissioned, and 3 nuclear power reactors had

been fully decommissioned. In addition, 30 research reactors were in operation in 12

countries (8).

In total, 17 Member States currently manage spent nuclear fuel on their territory.

The decommissioning of nuclear power plants is a major activity for the European nuclear

industry. Decommissioning of nuclear facilities is ongoing in a quarter of the Member States,

and the volume of radioactive waste from decommissioning is increasing.

2.2 Inventory estimates

By the end of 2023, the estimated total inventory of radioactive waste in the EU was

2 593 000 m3 (an 11% increase since the previous reporting period, corresponding to an

average yearly production of less than 65 000 m3). Table 1 shows the overview of the amount

of radioactive waste in 2023 compared with 2019. Approximately 66% (1 692 000 m3) of this

waste had been disposed of, and 34% (901 000 m3) was in storage and still required further

management. By the end of 2023, the amount of radioactive waste in the 15 Member States

with nuclear power programmes (9) accounted for 99.5% of the total volume of radioactive

waste inventory in the EU.

Most Member States have presented their radioactive waste inventories using the

classification scheme set out in the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safety guide

GSG-1 (10) or have provided matrices enabling data to be converted from their national

classification scheme into the classification scheme recommended by the IAEA. Most

(6) Belgium, Bulgaria, Czechia, Finland, France, Hungary, the Netherlands, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain and Sweden. In

addition, although it has no nuclear power plant within its own national borders, Croatia co-owns the Krsko nuclear power plant with Slovenia

(7) See IAEA Power Reactor Information System: https://www.iaea.org/pris.

(8) See IAEA Research Reactor Database: https://nucleus.iaea.org/rrdb/home#/home.

(9) Belgium, Bulgaria, Czechia, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia,

Spain and Sweden. (10) ‘Classification of Radioactive Waste’, General Safety Guide, IAEA, Vienna, 2009.

5

countries also used the harmonised set of data for reporting national inventories, which was

prepared jointly by the Commission, the IAEA and the OECD Nuclear Energy Agency.

Data show that in those countries where disposal routes are open for very-low-level waste

(VLLW) and low-level waste (LLW), the process from generation to disposal appears to

generally function well. This is not the case for intermediate-level waste (ILW), high-level

waste (HLW) and spent fuel, as there are currently no operational disposal facilities to handle

these categories.

Table 1: Volume of radioactive waste in the EU in 2019 and 2023.

Waste EU radioactive waste amounts (m3, rounded to thousands*)

Class Stored Disposed Total

Year 2019 2023 2019 2023 2019 2023

VLLW 233 000 303 000 462 000 558 000 695 000 861 000

LLW 353 000 381 000 1 068 000 1 109 000 1 421 000 1 491 000

ILW 191 000 211 000 22 000 25 000 213 000 236 000

HLW 4 800 5 200 0 0 4 800 5 200

Total (m3) 782 000 901 000 1 552 000 1 692 000 2 334 000 2 593 000

* Except for HLW, which is rounded to hundreds.

By the end of 2023, approximately 59 500 tHM of spent fuel was stored in the EU (an

increase of approximately 6% from 2019). All spent fuel in the EU is currently in storage, as

no civil disposal facility for spent fuel is in operation anywhere in the world. There are still

small amounts of spent fuel that are sent for reprocessing outside the EU; therefore,

radioactive waste resulting from reprocessing is expected to be returned latest in the next

decades.

3 SAFE AND RESPONSIBLE MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE AND

SPENT FUEL

3.1 National frameworks and programmes

Across the EU, national frameworks have generally continued to improve in recent years; the

self-assessments, strengthened by international peer reviews, have proven to be one of the

driving forces behind these positive developments.

One key obligation under the Directive is the development of a national programme – a

national strategic roadmap or plan setting out how national policies are being or will be

implemented. All Member States have national programmes in place and are continuously

developing them. During the reporting period, 11 Member States notified the Commission of

their updated national programmes. However, there were also cases where Member States did

not review and update national programmes as regularly as set out in their national legislation.

The steady implementation of national programmes and their prompt updating when needed

are hallmarks of responsible management of radioactive waste and spent fuel. This requires

Member States to optimise planning, commit sufficient resources, carry out the required

research and training activities and secure engagement with the public and other stakeholders.

6

There are no ongoing infringements related to transposition of the Directive and national

frameworks. However, during the previous reporting cycles, the Commission had to initiate

several procedures against some Member States regarding the implementation of the Directive

and on the compliance of their national programmes with the Directive’s requirements. By the

end of 2025, there were 16 ongoing infringement procedures (11).

3.2 Competent authorities

Competent regulatory authorities are granted technical and financial independence, based on

the information provided in national reports.

Adequate staffing of regulators is essential for the safe and effective rollout of national

programmes. The recent renewed interest and investments in nuclear energy projects means

that Member States need to anticipate strengthening their competent authorities, including for

the safe management of radioactive waste and spent fuel. The Commission has provided an

analysis of the needs related to new reactors and long-term operations in the latest nuclear

illustrative programme (PINC) (12), keeping in mind that different Member States have

different administrative approaches.

3.3 Circularity and disposal policies

The generation of radioactive waste, as well as amount of radioactive waste to be disposed

should be kept to the minimum which is reasonably practicable. The options as clearance of

materials from regulatory control and their subsequent reuse or recycling are particularly

apparent in ongoing decommissioning activities.

While most Member States plan to dispose of radioactive waste and spent fuel in their

territory, not all of them have made their final decision and some are still considering the

possibility of joint multinational disposal solutions. The Commission has carried out the pilot

project ‘Proposal for a Joint European Approach towards Radioactive Waste’ (13), involving

as many national authorities as possible in setting up a forum to discuss potential joint

solutions to waste management in Europe.

Member States with nuclear power programmes intend to dispose of their spent fuel in deep

geological facilities. Some countries are reprocessing their spent fuel, while others are

keeping that option open.

The first spent fuel disposal facility is scheduled to begin operations in Finland by 2027. In

Sweden and France, investment projects for the construction of similar facilities are under

way and expected to be completed in the next decade. Compared with the previous report,

(11) Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Denmark, Germany, Estonia, Ireland, Greece, Croatia, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Netherlands, Portugal

Romania and Slovenia. (12) Communication from the Commission, Nuclear Illustrative Programme presented under Article 40 of the Euratom Treaty – Final

(after the opinion of the EESC), COM/2026/120 final of 10.3.2026, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-

content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:52026DC0120.

(13) Based on the initiative from Members of the European Parliament, the financing was included in the EU budget.

https://energy.ec.europa.eu/document/download/b74f0a8f-ef96-45ce-8301-

5c8d86b9c5d1_en?filename=C_2023_4577_1_EN_annexe_acte_autonome_nlw_part1_v1.pdf

7

more Member States are actively working on different preparatory stages for deep geological

facilities. The envisaged dates for commissioning most deep geological repositories for high-

level waste and spent fuel currently fall between 2050 and 2075.

3.4 Cost assessments and financing

Nearly all Member States provided information on the cost assessment of their national

programmes. In 2023, the assessed total cost of management of radioactive waste and spent

fuel (14) in the EU remained around EUR 300 billion, in line with the Commission’s previous

reports.

The national estimates vary widely in terms of methodology, assumptions, completeness of

data, scope and time frames because different national circumstances require different

domestic approaches. To achieve a higher level of transparency and greater security of

funding, the Commission is working with Member States through the Nuclear Backend

Financial Aspects expert group (15) to provide guidance on reporting the costs of national

programmes for radioactive waste and spent fuel management.

Most Member States also provided information on the financing schemes for implementing

national programmes, taking into account the responsibility of spent fuel and radioactive

waste generators. There are considerable differences in these schemes, with a few Member

States relying on a fee levied on electricity generation, others on payments based on

characteristics of the waste, and some on state budget.

As expenditure is typically incurred only after the use of radioactive materials or nuclear fuel

– in some cases several decades later – back-end costs must be taken into account at an early

stage of new nuclear activities. In the PINC, the Commission pointed out that government

commitment and adequate funding from waste generators for effective decommissioning and

responsible management of radioactive waste and spent fuel is key to ensuring safety and

continued public support for the use of nuclear energy.

3.5 Programme monitoring and reporting

Several Member States have made progress in using key performance indicators to monitor

implementation of national programmes. However, challenges remain in ensuring effective

progress monitoring and performance reporting.

Reporting on the research, development and demonstration activities that are needed to

implement solutions for the management of radioactive waste and spent fuel was, in most

cases, very general. Member States are encouraged to provide more specific and targeted

information on those activities. The Commission notes positively that most Member States

make use of the ongoing European Partnership on Radioactive Waste Management (16).

(14) Estimated total cost of radioactive waste management’ means the aggregated total cost of all the EU Member States’ national

programmes covering all types of spent fuel and radioactive waste under their jurisdiction and all stages of spent fuel and radioactive

waste management from generation to disposal. (15) https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/expert-groups-register/screen/expert-groups/consult?lang=en&groupID=3777.

(16) https://www.ejp-eurad.eu/.

8

3.6 Transparency and public participation

Member States have not reported major updates on measures and approaches to transparency

and public participation. The Commission reiterates the importance of implementing the

transparency and public participation requirements effectively, including by providing

specific information on practices when reporting to the Commission.

4 CONCLUSIONS

During the reporting period radioactive waste and spent fuel were managed safely in Member

States. National frameworks and programmes are in place across the EU and were generally

set up in a transparent and participative manner. All Member States should make sure that

their national programmes are up to date. The system of self-assessments and international

peer reviews appeared consistent with the needs and is driving updates and continuous

improvement in waste management.

For the largest share of radioactive waste by volume, safe solutions for management

(including disposal) were pursued, as once again demonstrated by the increase in disposed

volumes against the decrease in stored volumes. Overall, most Member States are working to

develop disposal facilities. However, several still lack clearly defined management strategies

for radioactive waste and spent fuel, which hampers their progress.

The monitoring and funding of Member States’ national programmes remain the main

unresolved issues requiring the attention of national authorities. Cost assessments are

sometimes outdated or not comprehensive enough. This can affect the effectiveness of

financing schemes and create the risk that they will be insufficient to cover future costs,

thereby placing an undue burden on future generations. There are already ongoing activities

relating to guidance on reporting the costs of national programmes (17). However, there are

additional areas where more specific reporting criteria would support Member States in

preparing their national reports.

(17) Nuclear Back-end Financial Aspects expert group Draft the guidelines on reporting on the costs related to

the national programme on spent fuel and radioactive waste management https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/expert-groups-register/screen/expert-

groups/consult?lang=en&groupID=3777

EN EN

EUROPEAN COMMISSION

Brussels, 29.9.2026 SWD(2026) 285 final

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT

Inventory of radioactive waste and spent fuel present in the Community's territory and

the future prospects

Accompanying the document

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN

PARLIAMENT

on progress of implementation of Council Directive 2011/70 EURATOM and an

inventory of radioactive waste and spent fuel present in the Community's territory and

the future prospects - FOURTH REPORT

{COM(2026) 512 final} - {SWD(2026) 286 final}

1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of abbreviations ................................................................................................................... 2

1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 3

2. Sources of information ....................................................................................................... 3

3. Sources of radioactive waste and spent fuel ....................................................................... 6

4. Classification of radioactive waste and spent fuel ............................................................. 7

5. Current radioactive waste and spent fuel inventory in the European Union ...................... 8

6. Projections of radioactive waste and spent fuel ............................................................... 25

Annex I: Radioactive waste and spent fuel inventory data ...................................................... 29

2

List of abbreviations

DSRS Disused sealed radioactive sources

EU European Union

HLW High-level waste

IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency

ILW Intermediate-level waste

LLW Low-level waste

NORM Naturally occurring radioactive material

RAW Radioactive waste

SF Spent fuel

tHM Tons of heavy metal

VLLW Very low-level waste

3

1. Introduction

According to Article 14(2)(b) of Council Directive 2011/70/Euratom1, which establishes a

Community framework for the responsible and safe management of spent fuel and radioactive

waste (‘the Directive’), the European Commission (‘the Commission’), on the basis of the

Member States’ reports, is to submit to the European Parliament and the Council an inventory

of radioactive waste and spent fuel present in the Community’s territory and its future

prospects.

The goal of this Staff Working Document (SWD) is to present an overview of radioactive

waste and spent fuel inventory in the European Union, as well as its future prospects,

and to provide background information to the inventory data presented in the Fourth Report

from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on the progress of

implementation of Council Directive 2011/70/Euratom, and an inventory of radioactive waste

and spent fuel present in the Community’s territory, along with its future prospects

(COM(2026) 512).

This fourth SWD includes inventory data as of the end of 2023, although a few Member

States reported inventory as of end-2022 or as of mid-2024 (more information on the

inventory dates are provided in Chapter 2 – Sources of information). The document provides

an overview of:

• the total radioactive waste and spent fuel inventory on EU territory as of the end of 2023;

• a forecast of the EU inventory for 2030, based on available information reported by

Member States;

• updated trends of radioactive waste and spent fuel inventory in the EU.

Updated information about the Member States’ installations generating radioactive waste and

spent fuel, national policies, programmes, concepts, plans and financing mechanisms is

summarised in the SWD(2026) 286 on the progress of the implementation of Council

Directive 2011/70/Euratom.

2. Sources of information

The European Union radioactive waste and spent fuel inventory data presented in this

document is based on the fourth national reports submitted by all Member States in 2024.

Article 14(1) of the Directive indicates that Member States can take advantage of the review

and reporting under the Joint Convention2. During previous reporting cycles, the deadlines for

submission of national reports to both legal instruments were different, resulting in a number

of Member States reporting their inventory data to the Joint Convention and to the

1 Council Directive 2011/70/Euratom of 19 July 2011 establishing a Community framework for the responsible

and safe management of spent fuel and radioactive waste; OJ L 199/48, 2.8.2011. 2 The Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste

Management.

4

Commission using different reference dates. Due to the delay caused by the COVID-19

pandemic, the deadlines for submission of the Joint Convention reports shifted in the last

cycle. For the first time, the deadlines for reporting under the Joint Convention and

submission of national reports on the implementation of the Directive to the Commission

were the same (August 2024), so all Member States have used the same radioactive waste and

spent fuel inventory data for both reporting obligations.

Twenty Member States out of 27 reported their inventory data from 2023. Three Member

States (France, Italy, and Spain) reported their inventory data as of 2022, while the remaining

four Member States have chosen to report even newer inventory data.

France, which accounts for approximately 72% of the overall EU radioactive waste volume,

reported its inventory data for 2022. However, since the submission of its report to the

Commission, France has produced and published updated inventory data for 20233. In order

to provide an overview of the latest situation and to ensure the accuracy and timeliness of the

data, the newer French inventory data (as of the end of 2023) has been used in this report.

With this change, the distribution of radioactive waste volumes by reporting year is:

• approximately 95% inventory with the reference date as of 2023;

• approximately 5% inventories with the reference dates of 2022;

• 0.003% with the reference date of 2024.

Based on this, 2023 has been chosen as the reference date for the overall EU radioactive waste

and spent fuel inventory in this document, to simplify data presentation.

For the trend analysis, inventory data from previous Commission reports is used. It should

be noted that the inventory data provided in the first and second Commission reports included

inventory information from the United Kingdom. As the United Kingdom left the European

Union on 31 January 2020, all the historical inventory data used for identification of trends

have been adjusted, i.e. the historical inventory data from 2013 and 2016 presented in this

report were adjusted to represent inventory of 27 European Union Member States.

It needs to be noted that, in preparation of this report, most of the sources of uncertainty

identified in the document SWD(2017)161 final, remained valid. In other words:

• Member States are using different radioactive waste classification schemes. For EU

inventory aggregation purposes conversion to a common reporting basis is necessary

(IAEA GSG-1 classification4; see Chapter 4 below). However, transition from one

classification scheme to another often introduces uncertainties, as the radioactive waste

classes in different national classification schemes sometimes cannot be directly matched.

In such situations, transformation is carried out on a ‘best approximation’ basis.

3 https://inventaire.andra.fr. 4 Classification of Radioactive Waste. IAEA Safety Standards No. GSG-1, 2009, Vienna.

5

• Several Member States do not have a separate VLLW class, and all VLLW radioactive

waste is included in the LLW class. This is primarily due to the planned disposal routes,

where the intention is for all short-lived radioactive waste (VLLW and LLW) to be

disposed of in the same facility. In most cases, using the same management route renders

the introduction of additional waste classes unnecessary. As a result, at the EU level,

VLLW quantities are underestimated, and LLW quantities are overestimated.

• Member States use different fundamental properties(i.e. volume, mass) to report amounts

of unconditioned waste. Conversion from mass to volume without detailed knowledge of

the radioactive waste treatment/conditioning methods used can result in significant

uncertainties5.

• Member States use different approaches to report the volume of radioactive waste; some

report volumes as the actual volume in storage, while others report estimated volumes

after conditioning for disposal. For inventory aggregation purposes, the estimated

volumes of radioactive waste to be emplaced in disposal are preferred, since this

represents the final step in management of radioactive waste. The use of actual

radioactive waste volumes in storage can lead to significant uncertainties, especially

when estimating the need for disposal capacities.

Usually, the most significant volume changes (reduction) occur as a result of liquid

radioactive waste and sludge treatment and conditioning for disposal. The same is true for

combustible and compactible radioactive waste, as well as for the treatment of metallic

waste.

In the fourth national reports, most of the Member States reported estimated disposal

volumes for unconditioned waste. This allows for the reduction of uncertainties and the

improvement of consistency and comparability of the data.

• Reporting of disused sealed radioactive sources varies from country to country. Countries

with large nuclear programmes generally integrate disused sealed radioactive sources into

other large radioactive waste streams and do not report them separately. Countries where

the disused sealed radioactive sources make up a significant part of the national inventory

report them separately from the other radioactive waste. In such cases, disused sealed

radioactive sources are reported only as number of sources.

• Knowledge of radioactive contamination of facilities subject to decommissioning plays

an important role in predicting amounts of decommissioning waste. Detailed

characterisation of a facility subject to decommissioning increases the precision in

forecasting the amount of radioactive waste, however, only when decommissioning is

well progressed will the actual categories and amounts of waste be fully known. This is

also valid for the limited knowledge of characteristics of some legacy wastes.

• Future radioactive waste inventories highly depend on various decisions introducing

additional uncertainties in the projection of future radioactive waste inventories, e.g.

o Technological decisions,such as the selection of treatment and conditioning

options, the choice between immediate or deferred decommissioning, the

decision to retrieve disposed radioactive waste, might have significant impact

5 A simple approach is to use 1 t ≡ 1 m3 equivalence.

6

on the projection of future radioactive waste inventories (e.g. volumes, waste

classes).

o Political decisions and changes in the legal/regulatory framework, such as the

development of new nuclear facilities, changes to the nuclear fuel cycle or

introduction of new radioactive waste classes.

When the development of Member States' inventories over time was assessed, the following

additional sources of uncertainties remained.

• Differences in the reference dates of Member States’ inventories. For the current

reporting period, the majority of all Member States reported inventories as of the end of

2023 and only a few Member States have chosen to report inventories with the reference

dates of 2022 or 2024.

• Change in radioactive waste status. During the reporting period, no changes were

reported in the status of previously disposed radioactive waste. However, some Member

States plan to recover previously disposed radioactive waste in the future, process it, and

re-dispose of it in existing and/or newly constructed disposal facilities. Re-disposal

activities might affect the overall radioactive waste inventory as a result of subsequent re-

treatment and re-disposal. There are already a few Member States that have taken a

decision on the remediation of disposal sites; thus, their radioactive waste is considered

as stored whilst awaiting retrieval.

3. Sources of radioactive waste and spent fuel

Radioactive waste is generated in all Member States of the European Union, although the

quantities are very small in non-nuclear power Member States compared to those Member

States operating nuclear power plants. The radioactive waste inventory in small countries

usually consists of disused sealed radioactive sources or small amounts of orphan/legacy

radioactive materials. Small volumes of radioactive waste are generated as a result of non-

power uses of radioactive materials, such as the manufacturing of radioactive materials for

use in medical and industrial applications, or research facilities like laboratories and research

reactors. Most of the Member States with research reactors have an agreement in place to

return spent fuel to the suppliers.

Most of the radioactive waste come from nuclear power plants and associated nuclear fuel

cycle activities, i.e. from conversion of uranium to fuel fabrication, to its use for electricity

generation, and the subsequent reprocessing of spent fuel. In the fourth national report, 17

Member States have declared spent fuel. Some of those Member States have chosen to

reprocess spent fuel, some Member States have chosen the once-through fuel cycle option

when spent fuel will be directly disposed in deep geological disposal. A few Member States

applied both approaches – part of their spent fuel is reprocessed and the remaining part will be

directly disposed. Currently, spent fuel is stored in specialised storage facilities until final

disposal facilities become available. In terms of activity, most of the radioactive waste is

generated during operation of nuclear facilities. However, in terms of volume, most of the

7

waste comes from decommissioning nuclear power plants and other nuclear facilities at the

end of their useful lifetime, and it is mainly low-level waste.

Few Member States manage radioactive materials from extractive industries, e.g. past

uranium mining and milling activities. In some of them, these materials are declared as

radioactive waste and reported as a part of their radioactive waste inventory, whereas in other

Member States that is not the case. Therefore, an aggregate estimate and comparison of

inventories of waste containing naturally occurring radioactive material between Member

States, or the compilation of an overall European Union inventory (including NORM waste),

are currently not possible and therefore falls outside the scope of this report.

4. Classification of radioactive waste and spent fuel

In line with Article 12(1)(c) of the Directive, Member States need to develop, as part of their

national programmes, and notify to the Commission, radioactive waste and spent fuel

inventories in accordance with an appropriate classification. Correspondingly, Member States

reported in their fourth national reports on their radioactive waste and spent fuel inventories

based on radioactive waste classifications that may differ from one Member State to another.

As in the previous report, in order to make radioactive waste and spent fuel inventories

comparable among different Member States and in order to aggregate the overall inventory on

the territory of the European Union, Member States inventories have been translated into a

common classification scheme. The IAEA GSG-1 classification system has been chosen for

that purpose in order to facilitate Member States reporting to various international

organisations (e.g. IAEA) and instruments (e.g. Joint Convention).

The categories of radioactive waste used for data aggregation are as follows.

• Very low-level waste (VLLW): waste that does not need a high level of containment and

isolation and, therefore, is suitable for disposal in near surface landfill-type facilities with

limited regulatory control.

• Low-level waste (LLW): waste that is above clearance levels, but with limited amounts

of long-lived radionuclides. Such waste requires robust isolation and containment for

periods of up to a few hundred years and is suitable for disposal in engineered near-

surface facilities. This class covers a very broad range of waste. LLW may include short-

lived radionuclides at higher levels of activity concentration, and also long-lived

radionuclides, but only at relatively low levels of activity concentration.

• Intermediate-level waste (ILW): waste that, because of its content, particularly of long-

lived radionuclides, requires a greater degree of containment and isolation than that

provided by near-surface disposal. However, ILW needs no provision, or only limited

provision, for heat dissipation during its storage and disposal. ILW may contain long-

lived radionuclides, in particular, alpha-emitting radionuclides that will not decay to a

level of activity concentration acceptable for near-surface disposal during the time for

8

which institutional controls can be relied upon. Therefore, waste in this class requires

disposal at greater depths, of the order of tens of metres to a few hundred metres.

• High-level waste (HLW): waste with levels of activity concentration high enough to

generate significant quantities of heat by the radioactive decay process or waste with

large amounts of long-lived radionuclides that need to be considered in the design of a

disposal facility for such waste. Disposal in deep, stable geological formations, usually

several hundred metres or more below the surface is the generally recognised option for

disposal of HLW.

In addition to the above-mentioned waste classes, the IAEA GSG-1 classification system lays

down the following:

• Exempt waste with concentrations of radionuclides small enough to not require

provisions for radiation protection. Such material can be cleared from regulatory control

and does not require any further consideration from a regulatory control perspective.

• Very short-lived waste containing only very short half-life radionuclides. Such waste

can be stored until the activity has fallen beneath the levels of clearance, allowing for the

cleared waste to be managed as conventional waste.

The latter two waste classes do not require future long-term management or disposal as

radioactive waste due to their short-lifetime and/or levels. This allows them to be exempted or

cleared from regulatory control. Accordingly, exempt waste and very short-lived waste are in

most cases not reported by Member States. Therefore, these waste classes have not been used

for data aggregation in the present document.

Several Member States combine VLLW and LLW, or do not have a separate VLLW class. In

the latter case, such material could be subject to clearance in accordance with the respective

national legislation. Reflecting the disposal routes, several Member States also use a

combined waste class, ‘low and intermediate-level waste’ (LILW). Where a system other than

the IAEA GSG-1 classification system is used for reporting by Member States, a conversion

provided by the Member States is applied in this report in order to achieve the transformation

from the national to the IAEA classification system.

Spent fuel (SF) is also considered in its entirety, whether it might be intended for

reprocessing or awaiting decision for future long-term management (reprocessing or

disposal).

5. Current radioactive waste and spent fuel inventory in the European Union

This Section is dedicated to the presentation and analysis of the radioactive waste and spent

fuel inventory present in the Community’s territory and its future prospects as required by

Article 14(2)(b) of the Directive. The information used to compile this Section was primarily

collected from the fourth national reports. The details on the reported national inventories are

given in Annex I of this document. The first Commission report contained information on the

9

radioactive waste disposed of at sea (Table I.8 of the Staff Working Document

SWD(2017)161 final). As such disposal practices were prohibited by the London Convention

that entered into force in 1975, and no new information has emerged since publication of the

first Commission report, information on radioactive waste disposed of at sea is excluded from

this document.

The Section is composed of two parts – the first part deals with the radioactive waste

inventory and the second part is dedicated to the spent fuel inventory.

Overall, inventory data reported in the fourth national reports are generally consistent with the

data provided in national programmes and third national reports. In most of the cases, national

reports provided sufficient information to explain non-typical changes in the inventories (e.g.

successful volume reduction programmes resulting in reduction of waste amounts without

presence of disposal activities). However, the number of sources of uncertainties previously

listed in Section 2 of this document still remains an obstacle for most complete and

comprehensive reporting of national and EU inventory.

EU radioactive waste inventory

The estimated total inventory of radioactive waste on European Union territory at the end of

2023 was 2 593 000 m3. Approximately 65% of this waste has already been disposed of

(1 692 000 m3), while 35% (901 000 m3) is still in storage and will have to be managed in the

future. Compared to the 2019 radioactive waste inventory, reported in the last Commission

report, there has been a 10% increase in total radioactive waste volumes. Between 2016 and

2019 there was a 5% total radioactive waste inventory increase. The larger increase in

radioactive waste volumes can be attributed to a longer period between inventory reports, as

well as progress in decommissioning nuclear power plants, which has resulted in larger

volumes of VLLW and LLW.

Table 1 and Figure 1 summarises the overall amounts of radioactive waste in the European

Union with comparison to previous reporting (i.e. development since 2019).

10

Table 1: Volumes of radioactive waste in the European Union in 2019 and 2023.

Waste class

EU RAW Amounts (m3, rounded to thousands)6

Stored Disposed Total

2019 2023 2019 2023 2019 2023

VLLW 233 000 303 000 462 000 558 000 695 000 861 000

LLW 353 000 385 000 1 068 000 1 113 000 1 421 000 1 497 000

ILW 191 000 208 000 22 000 21 000 213 000 229 000

HLW 4 800 5 200 0 0 4 800 5 200

Total (m3) 782 000 901 000 1 552 000 1 692 000 2 334 000 2 593 000

Figure 1: Distribution of the RAW in the EU between stored and disposed waste by waste

class at the end of 2019 and 2023.

Figure 2 and Figure 3 provides information on the distribution of radioactive waste in the

European Union by waste class and by management status. As it can be seen from those

figures, the distribution of radioactive waste by class has not changed significantly compared

6 Except for HLW, which is rounded to hundreds.

11

to 2019. As in previous reporting, VLLW and LLW together make up approximately 90% of

the overall waste amount. The share of ILW has slightly decreased and is now estimated at

8.8% (see Figure 3). HLW makes by far the smallest fraction of the overall waste volume,

accounting for less than 0.2% (all HLW is kept in storage).

Figure 2: Distribution of the total RAW in the EU between stored and disposed waste at the

end of 2019 and 2023.

Figure 3: Distribution of the total RAW in the EU by waste category at the end of 2019 and

2023.

Even though LLW dominates radioactive waste inventory, two specific points should be taken

into consideration.

• The majority of Member States without nuclear power programme and some nuclear

Member States do not have separate VLLW class as defined in the IAEA GSG-1 waste

classification scheme. In such cases all the VLLW is reported as part of LLW waste class,

meaning that for some Member States the actual fraction of disposed LLW volumes

could be significantly lower.

12

• Some Member States do not register (partially or completely) VLLW amounts in their

national inventory.

Both above-mentioned issues lead to a situation where VLLW amounts are underestimated

and LLW overestimated.

The total quantity of the disposed radioactive waste as of end-2023 equals 1 692 000 m3.

This is approximately 65% of total RAW and consists mainly of LLW, i.e. 66% of the

disposed radioactive waste is LLW. At the end of 2023, 65% of the total VLLW volume was

reported as disposed of and the amount of VLLW disposed has steadily increased. At the

same time, 74% of LLW is reported as disposed. Few Member States have reported small

amounts of ILW disposed of (1.4% of the total disposed waste). Some Member States are

considering whether to retrieve ILW and re-dispose of it in new disposal facilities.

The total reported volume of stored radioactive waste in 2023 was 901 000 m3. LLW makes

up most of this amount (42.7%), while VLLW and ILW make up 33.7% and 23.1%,

respectively. The HLW fraction in the overall radioactive waste in storage is 0.6% and it

remains unchanged since the previous report.

Radioactive waste inventory - trends in the EU

The development of the total amount of radioactive waste (Table 2), radioactive waste in

storage (Table 3) and radioactive waste which has been disposed of (Table 4) is based on the

data from the previous Commission reports published in 2017 (inventory data from 2013),

2019 (inventory data 2016), 2024 (inventory data 2019), and on the current data from the

fourth national reports (inventory data 2023).

Table 2: Development of total radioactive waste inventory since 2013.

Waste class Total amount (m3, rounded to thousands)7

2013* 2016* 2019 2023

VLLW 515 000 601 000 696 000 861 000

LLW 1 345 000 1 420 000 1 420 000 1 497 000

ILW 185 000 190 000 213 000 229 000

HLW 4 300 4 500 4 800 5 200

Total (m3) 2 049 000 2 216 000 2 334 000 2 593 000

* Inventory from 2013 and 2016 refers to 27 Member States without the United Kingdom.

7 Except for HLW, which is rounded to hundreds.

13

Figure 4 presents the development of radioactive waste inventory for the period 2013-2023.

The amounts of radioactive waste steadily increase for each waste class, with the LLW

remaining dominant waste class in terms of total volume and disposal rate.

Figure 4: Development of total radioactive waste volumes since the end of 2013

(with the percentage of waste disposed of indicated).

Development of the stored radioactive waste volumes (per waste category) is presented in

Table 3.

Table 3: Development of stored radioactive waste in the 2013-2023 period.

Waste class Stored amount (m3, rounded to thousands)8

2013* 2016* 2019 2023

VLLW 236 000 233 000 233 000 303 000

LLW 358 000 381 000 353 000 385 000

ILW 173 000 178 000 191 000 208 000

HLW 4 300 4 500 4 800 5 200

Total (m3) 771 000 797 000 782 000 901 000

* Inventory from 2013 and 2016 refers to 27 Member States without the United Kingdom.

8 Except for HLW, which is rounded to hundreds.

14

There are currently no operational deep geological disposal facilities for ILW and HLW.

Consequently, the amounts of stored ILW and HLW are steadily increasing over time. The

amounts of VLLW and LLW in storage are affected by differences in generation, treatment

and disposal rates. During different time periods, their respective amounts in storage may

therefore increase or decrease. The volume of stored VLLW and LLW is fairly stable and has

not changed significantly since 2013. This shows that the disposal rate of VLLW and LLW is

aligned with the generation rate of the radioactive waste.

Table 4 shows the development of radioactive waste disposal over time. It shows a steady

increase of disposed VLLW and LLW since 2013, confirming that the disposal system is

functioning properly.

Table 4: Development of radioactive waste disposals in the 2013-2023 period.

Waste class Disposed amount (m3, rounded to thousands)9

2013* 2016* 2019 2023

VLLW 279 000 369 000 462 000 558 000

LLW 987 000 1 039 000 1 068 000 1 113 000

ILW 12 000 12 000 22 000 21 000

HLW 0 0 0 0

Total (m3) 1 279 000 1 420 000 1 552 000 1 692 000

* Inventory from 2013 and 2016 refers to 27 Member States without the United Kingdom.

Table 4 also shows that some Member States are disposing of ILW. However, this is not yet

widespread practice. These disposals, in accordance with the IAEA classification, consist

mainly of highly active disused radioactive sealed sources containing short-lived

radionuclides. Approximately 91% of ILW is still kept in storage and pending proper disposal

facilities.

Overall, situation remains broadly the same compared to the situation described in the

previous Commission reports. Approximately 26% of the LLW amount generated is kept in

storage. There has been no systematic increase in the amounts in storage between 2013 and

2023 and the overall LLW amount of waste generated and disposed is generally in

equilibrium. LLW disposal is dominated by Member States with large LLW inventories

(primarily France), whereas a number of Member States with smaller inventories do not yet

dispose of their LLW.For ILW the situation is very different. In 2023, approximately 9% of

the total ILW volume was reported as disposed. There is a steady increase of ILW in storage.

9 Except for HLW, which is rounded to hundreds.

15

For HLW and spent fuel declared as radioactive waste, the first disposal facility is expected to

start operation soon in Finland, followed by similar facilities in Sweden (in around 2030) and

France (in around 2035).Therefore, the amounts of HLW and spent fuel in storage should be

expected to increase steadily in line with their generation.

Currently, 12 Member States10 have radioactive waste disposal facilities either in operation or

closed (nuclear power programme countries: Czechia, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary,

Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden; non-nuclear programme countries: Latvia and

Poland). Based on the information from the national programmes and reports, several

Member States are in the process of siting or building the disposal facilities and it is expected

that more disposal facilities will become operational in the coming years.

This report presents the status of RAW inventory for all Member States. However, there are

significant differences in the amounts of managed radioactive waste between Member States

with and without nuclear power programmes. Because of this difference in scale, this

document presents the inventories for Member States with and without nuclear power

programme separately.

There are fifteen11,12 European Union Member States that operate or have operated nuclear

power plants. At aggregate level, these Member States have 100 times the amount of RAW

stored on their territory as compared with the 12 Member States without nuclear power

programme. This difference varies between RAW classes and e.g. for VLLW it is almost

5 400 times and for LLW and ILW it is 57 and 85 times, respectively. The large difference in

VLLW amounts can be clarified by the fact that the majority of the Member States without

nuclear power programmes do not use the VLLW classification and classify all their short-

lived radioactive waste as LLW. It can be clearly seen that Member States without nuclear

power programmes are contributing very little to the overall European Union radioactive

waste inventory in storage (see Figure 5).

10 Bulgaria and Lithuania categorised and using these past disposal (RADON type) facilities as storage facilities.

See Table 5 of the Staff Working Document (2024)123 on Progress of Implementation of Council

Directive 2011/70/Euratom. 11 Krško NPP is co-owned by Slovenia and Croatia. The radioactive waste and spent fuel inventory at Krško

NPP is equally owned by Slovenia and Croatia. 12 Belgium, Bulgaria, Czechia, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Romania,

Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden.

16

Figure 5: Volumes of stored radioactive waste by class in Member States with and without

nuclear power programmes, end of 2019 and 2023.

Altogether, Member States with nuclear power programmes account for 99% of the

radioactive waste inventory in the European Union. The percentage share of the total RAW in

2023 between Member States with nuclear power programme is presented in Figure 6.

Total

Total

Total

Total

With nuclear power programme

Without nuclear power programme

With nuclear power programme

Without nuclear power programme

LLW LLW ILW LW

17

Figure 6: Distribution of total volumes of radioactive waste (2 580 000 m3) in Member States

with nuclear power programmes, end of 202313.

* Hungary, The Netherlands, Finland, Romania, and Slovenia account for 2% together

Having the largest fleet of nuclear power plants, France clearly dominates with the largest

volumes of radioactive waste (72% of the total radioactive waste in Member States with

nuclear power programme). The Member State with the next-highest share is Germany, with

9.5%. The total volume of radioactive waste in those Member States is shown individually in

Figure 7 (with indicated stored and disposed amounts in 2019 and 2023).

13 Member States’ (MS) abbreviations in this report are as follows Austria (AT), Belgium (BE), Bulgaria (BG),

Croatia (HR), Cyprus (CY), Czechia (CZ), Denmark (DK), Estonia (EE), Finland (FI), France (FR),

Germany (DE), Greece (EL), Hungary (HU), Ireland (IE), Italy (IT), Latvia (LV), Lithuania (LT),

Luxembourg (LU), Malta (MT), The Netherlands (NL), Poland (PL), Portugal (PT), Romania (RO),

Slovakia (SK), Slovenia (SI), Spain (ES) and Sweden (SE).

18

Figure 7: Volumes of RAW waste in the 15 Member States with nuclear power programmes,

end of 2019 and 2023.

Twelve Member States have no nuclear programme14, although six of them are operating or

have operated research, training or demonstration nuclear reactors. The distribution of the

total volume of radioactive waste among the Member States without nuclear power

programme is shown in Figure 8 and Figure 9 with information on stored and disposed

amounts for 2019 and 2023.

14 Croatia is co-owner of the Krško nuclear power plant, but in the context of this report it is considered as not

having a nuclear power programme.

D E

S E

E S

L T

S K

B G

IT B E

C

U

I

N L

S I

Stored Disposed

19

Figure 8: Distribution of total volumes of RAW in Member States without nuclear power

programmes, end of 2023 (HR, LU, CY, IE and MT have together 0.1%).

Figure 9: Volume of RAW waste in Member States without nuclear power programmes, end of

2019 and 2023.

P L

A T

D K

E E

L

P T

E L

M T

L U

C

IE

Stored Disposed

20

Member States with nuclear power programmes are primary contributors to the overall

radioactive waste inventory of the European Union. The radioactive waste amounts are in line

with the size of their respective nuclear programmes. The amounts of stored radioactive waste

in Member States with nuclear power programmes are shown in Figure 10 for 2019 and 2023

with information on amounts of all RAW waste classes.

Figure 10: Volumes of stored RAW waste by class in Member States with nuclear power

programmes, end of 2019 and 2023.

The amounts of stored radioactive waste for Member States without nuclear power

programmes are shown in Figure 11 for 2019 and 2023 with information on the amounts of all

RAW waste classes.

D E

L T

B G

S E

IT B E

S K

E S

N L

U

I

S I

C

LLW LLW ILW LW

21

Figure 11: Volumes of stored RAW by class in MSs without nuclear power programmes, end of

2019 and 2023.

The distribution of the disposed radioactive waste is presented in Figure 12 for all 27 Member

States regardless of whether they have nuclear power programme or not, with information on

the amounts of all RAW waste classes for 2019 and 2023 for comparison. No HLW waste

was disposed of in any Member State until this reporting period.

D K

A T

E E

P L

P T

E L

L

L U

C

IE M T

LLW LLW ILW

22

Figure 12: Volumes of radioactive waste disposed of in the European Union,

end of 2019 and 2023.

Spent fuel inventory

Based on the Member State strategy, spent fuel (from power and non-power reactors) is

stored pending either disposal or reprocessing. During reprocessing, uranium and plutonium

are recovered, with additional generation of radioactive waste (mainly HLW and ILW). As

there are no operational disposal facilities for spent fuel, it is currently stored until disposal

facilities become available.

At the end of 2023, approximately 58 600 tHM of spent fuel was stored in European Union

territory (an increase of about 5% since 2019 and 17% since 2013) and slightly more than

1000 tHM of spent fuel (about 1.7%) was sent for reprocessing outside the European Union

and is currently there in storage with the expected returns of resulting radioactive waste from

reprocessing. In total this results in approximately 59 600 tHM of spent fuel.

D E

S E

E S

S K

C

I

L T

U

P L

L

LLW LLW ILW

23

Figure 13: Spent fuel in storage at the end of 2019 and 2023.

The most recent reported amounts of spent fuel stored at each Member States are shown in

Figure 13, together with values from 2019 for comparison. Some Member States have smaller

inventories of spent fuel (or none) in storage than that generated by the nuclear power plants

because part of it or all of it has been reprocessed. On the other end, countries with neither

past nor current reprocessing have comparably high spent fuel inventories. An increase in the

spent fuel mass is visible in all Member States. The percentage share of spent fuel between

Member States is presented in Figure 14.

rance

Germany

Sweden

Spain

Belgium

omania

inland

Lithuania

C echia

Bulgaria

Slovakia

ungary

Slovenia

Italy

Netherlands

Denmark

Poland

24

Figure 14: Member States’ contribution to the overall spent fuel inventory in the European

Union at the end of 2023.

France accounts for nearly 24% of all spent fuel in the EU, followed by Germany at

approximately 17%. The third and fourth countries by volume are Sweden (13%) and Spain

(10%). There is a gradual but smaller difference among the rest of Member States. Figure 15

presents the development of the total spent fuel mass for all Member States since 2013.

Given that no disposal route is currently available for spent fuel (the first disposal facility is

expected to become operational soon) and that not all Member States are reprocessing their

spent fuel, there is a continual increase in the amount of spent fuel in storage (see Figure 15).

Figure 15: Development of spent fuel in storage owned by the Member States from 2013 up to

2023.

rance .

Germany .

Sweden .

Spain .

Belgium .

omania .

inland .

Lithuania .

C echia .

Bulgaria .

Slovakia .

ungary .

Slovenia .

Italy .

Netherlands .

Denmark .

Poland .

25

6. Projections of radioactive waste and spent fuel

The Staff Working Document on the EU Inventory (SWD(2017)161) reported that projections

of radioactive waste inventories in Member States differed in the level of detail and time

frames provided. Several Member States did not provide any or sufficiently detailed estimates

of their future inventory of spent fuel and/or radioactive waste, particularly for new builds and

decommissioning. Therefore, at that time, it was not possible for the Commission to forecast

future total EU inventories.

Starting from the second national reports, Member States significantly improved their

reporting of future projections, allowing the Commission to prepare an EU radioactive waste

and spent fuel forecast for 2030.

It must be stressed that all uncertainties previously mentioned are significantly larger for

future predictions, and the indicated future EU radioactive waste volumes are indicative only.

Due to limitations in the reported inventory data, only an estimation of short-term radioactive

waste and spent fuel projections for 2030 was possible. The majority of Member States

provided estimates of their future inventories for 2050. However, due to the unavailability of

2050 inventory forecast data from some large Member States, it is still not possible to produce

an overall EU long-term inventory forecast.

The Commission’s estimate of the EU’s radioactive waste and spent fuel inventory for is

presented in Table 5. Data reported by individual Member States are provided in Annex I of

this document.

Decommissioning of nuclear power plants is becoming an increasingly important activity for

the European nuclear industry due to the ageing of the reactor fleet. This has a significant

impact on the amounts of radioactive waste generated, particularly VLLW and low-level

waste, and should therefore be considered when planning disposal and storage facilities. As

shown in Figure 16 and 17, total VLLW volumes are expected to increase by one-third by

2030 compared to current levels, and a significant increase in LLW is also anticipated. The

current VLLW volumes represent 73.5% of the projected VLLW amounts in 2030 (a 36%

increase from current levels). For LLW, current amounts account for 84% of the projected

LLW amounts in 2030 (a 19% increase from current levels). The primary contributors to this

growth are the Member States with the largest nuclear programmes.

For intermediate-level waste and high-level waste, safe and responsible management remains

challenging due to the limited availability of long-term storage capacity and the need to

develop sustainable disposal solutions. It is projected that ILW volumes will increase by

approximately 5% by 2030, with the majority of this growth stemming from

decommissioning activities. The HLW increase of about 48% will primarily result from the

reprocessing of spent fuel, particularly in France.

26

Table 5: Estimated future amounts of RAW in the EU MSs for 2030.

Future RAW and SF amount estimates (m3, rounded to

thousands)15

VLLW LLW ILW HLW SF

2023 861 000 1 491 000 236 000 5 200 59 600

2030 1 171 000 1 778 000 247 000 7 700 66 900

Figure 16: Estimation of radioactive waste generation by 2030 compared to current

inventory.

15 Except for HLW, which is rounded to hundreds.

27

Figure 17: Volumes of total radioactive waste in the European Union, end of 2023 and

forecast for 2030.

The spent fuel inventory is expected to increase from 59 600 tHM to 66 900 tHM by 2030,

representing a 12% rise. It should be noted that the majority of Member States have not yet

reported inventories from new builds. However, as some Member States proceed with spent

fuel reprocessing, this projected increase does not fully represent the actual amount of spent

fuel discharged from reactors. Part of the spent fuel is sent for reprocessing outside the

European Union, and it is expected that approximately 1100 m3 of radioactive waste from

spent fuel reprocessing will be returned to the EU by 2030.

LLW LLW ILW LW

28

Annex I: Radioactive waste and spent fuel inventory data

‘-’ in the tables below means no data were received from the Member State or no such

practice exists

‘ ’ in the table means that data with value ‘ ’ was received from the Member State

Table I.1. Overall European Union radioactive waste inventory and future prospects as

at the end of 2023

Total RAW 2023 2030 2050 Other date

MS Category Volume,

m3

Decom.

Share, m3 Volume, m3

Decom.

Share, m3 Volume, m3

Decom.

Share, m3

Volume, m3

[Date, year] Decom.

Share, m3

Austria

VLLW - - - - - - - -

LLW 2 523 1 030 3 130 1 750 3 510 1 930

3 500

[2045] 1 930

[2045]

ILW 52 30 67 50 100 50 100 [2045] 50 [2045]

HLW - - - - - - - -

Belgium

VLLW - - - - - - - -

LLW 16 880 - - - - -

57 600

[2130] -

ILW 9 351 - - - - -

10 100

[2130] -

HLW 70 - - - - - 70 [2130] -

Bulgaria

VLLW 10 364 - 42 000 - - - - -

LLW 20 767 - 90 200 - - - - -

ILW 10 - 10 - - - - -

HLW 0 - 1 100 - - - - -

Croatia

VLLW - - - - - - - -

LLW 7.53 0 - - - - - -

ILW 3.81 0 - - - - - -

HLW 0 0 - - - - - -

Cyprus

VLLW - - - - - - - -

LLW - - <1 - <1 - - -

ILW - - - - - - - -

HLW - - - - - - - -

Czechia

VLLW - - - - - - - -

LLW 15 966 - - - - - - -

ILW 10 332 - - - - - - -

HLW - - - - - - -

Denmark

VLLW - - - - - - - -

LLW 5 709

- - - - - - -

ILW - - - - - - -

HLW - - - - - - - -

Estonia VLLW - - - - - - - -

LLW 1 077 - - - - - - -

29

Total RAW 2023 2030 2050 Other date

MS Category Volume,

m3

Decom.

Share, m3 Volume, m3

Decom.

Share, m3 Volume, m3

Decom.

Share, m3

Volume, m3

[Date, year] Decom.

Share, m3

ILW 21 - - - - - - -

HLW - - - - - - - -

Finland

VLLW 869 0 - - - - - -

LLW 12 479.3 38 - - - - - -

ILW 46.7 22 - - - - - -

HLW 0 0 - - - - - -

France

VLLW 702 000 - 926 000 - - - - -

LLW 1 001 100 - 1 100 000 - - - - -

ILW 156 800 - 157 500 - - - - -

HLW 4 550 - 5 630 - - - - -

Germany

VLLW - - - - - - - -

LLW 219 592* - - - - - - -

ILW 24 399* - - - - - - -

HLW 507 - - - - - - -

Greece

VLLW 27.84 - - - - - - -

LLW 299.53** - - - - - - -

ILW 0.93 - - - - - - -

HLW - - - - - - - -

Hungary

VLLW 3 354 - 4 023 - 4 499 - - -

LLW 8 386 - 10 057 - 11 247 - - -

ILW 5 512 - 6 566 - 7 455 - - -

HLW - - - - - - - -

Ireland

VLLW - - - - - - - -

LLW - - - - - - - -

ILW - - - - - - - -

HLW - - - - - - - -

Italy

VLLW 14 642 2 674 34 395 12 034 48 787 26 427

48 787

[2065] 26 427

[2065]

LLW 8 781 2 436 22 973 10 960 34 432 22 419

34 432

[2065] 22 419

[2065]

ILW 5 261 675 9 911 3 039 13 748 6 876

13 748

[2065] 6 876

[2065]

HLW 0 - 369 - 369 - 369 [2065] -

Latvia

VLLW - - - - - - - -

LLW 839 - 2 017 - 2 032 - - -

ILW 54 - 68 - 71 - - -

HLW 0 - - - - - - -

Lithuania

VLLW 27 987 - 33 200 - 53 500 - - -

LLW 39 546 - 30 530 - 114 417 - - -

ILW 1 287 - 2 562 - 7 500 - - -

HLW - - - - - - - -

Luxem-

bourg

VLLW - - - - - - - -

LLW 0.1 - - - 0.1 - - -

ILW - - - - - - - -

HLW - - - - - - - -

30

Total RAW 2023 2030 2050 Other date

MS Category Volume,

m3

Decom.

Share, m3 Volume, m3

Decom.

Share, m3 Volume, m3

Decom.

Share, m3

Volume, m3

[Date, year] Decom.

Share, m3

Malta

VLLW - - - - - - - -

LLW - - - - - - - -

ILW - - - - - - - -

HLW - - - - - - - -

The

Netherlan

ds

VLLW - *** - - - - - - -

LLW 12 876

- 14 548

- 20 615

- 31 461

[2130]

-

ILW - - - -

HLW 100.2 - 173 - 201 - 227 [2130] -

Poland

VLLW - - - - - - - -

LLW 2819.41 - - - - - - -

ILW 1 385 - - - - - - -

HLW - - - - - - - -

Portugal

VLLW 5.2 - - - - - - -

LLW 271.8 - - - - - - -

ILW 15.9 - - - - - - -

HLW - - - - - - - -

Romania

VLLW 270 - 200 - 100 - - -

LLW 3 630.1 - 3 733.7 - 7 395.92 - - -

ILW 105.48 - 228.6 - 509.98 - - -

HLW 0.13 - 0.02 - 0.02 - - -

Slovakia

VLLW 31 813.8 - - - - - - -

LLW 28 119 - - - - - - -

ILW 45.57 - - - - - - -

HLW - - - - - - - -

Slovenia

VLLW - - - - - - - -

LLW 2 382

- 2 972

- 3 467

- 3 342

[2040]

-

ILW - - - -

HLW - - - - - - - -

Spain

VLLW 33 759 21 682 51 300 30 000 121 300 94 100

125 000

[2100] 98 700

[2100]

LLW 41 142 3 997 56 000 10 000 93 900 46 700

94 200

[2100] 46 700

[2100]

ILW 201 185 300 200 2 700 700

3 900

[2100] 700 [2100]

HLW 13 0 13 0 13 0 13 [2100] 0 [2100]

Sweden

VLLW 36 050 - 55 000 - 64 000 - - -

LLW 53 300 - 90 000 - 145 000 - - -

ILW 12 600 - 15 000 - 15 000 - - -

HLW 0 - - - - - - -

* Indicated LLW and ILW amounts include 19 503t of unconditioned non-heat generating waste. For

aggregation purposes Commission Services assumed 1t = 1m3 (numbers not verified by Germany)

** Including uncharacterised radioactive waste at NCS ‘D’ and other facilities.

*** Information on VLLW inventory as well as origin of waste amounts is not registered in the Netherlands.

31

T b I. . Sp n r d n b r S ’ rri r

SF in storage on MS territory, tHM

Country 2023 2030 2050 Other date

(Mass/date)

Austria - - - -

Belgium 4 234.4 - - 4 500 [2130]

Bulgaria* 996 1 286 - -

Croatia** - - - -

Cyprus - - - -

Czechia 2 321 - - -

Denmark 0.238 - - -

Estonia - - - -

Finland 2 488 3 154 4 169 -

France 14 328 15 125 - -

Germany 10 045 10 049 10 049 -

Greece - - - -

Hungary 1 563 2 144 3 351 -

Ireland - - - -

Italy 15.819 2.95 2.95 2.95 [2040]

Latvia - - - -

Lithuania 2 397.528 2 397.528 2 397.528 -

Luxembourg - - - -

Malta - - - -

The Netherlands*** 11.4 m3 - - -

Poland 0.341 - - -

Portugal - - - -

Romania 4 138 5 795 14 383 -

Slovakia 1 813 - - -

Slovenia** 574 685 913 842 [2040]

Spain 5 924 7 467 - -

Sweden 7 726 9 500 4 000 -

* Excluding spent fuel shipped to the Russian Federation

** Spent fuel reported by Slovenia to be shared equally by Croatia and Slovenia.

*** Spent fuel stored in COVRA is accounted in m3.

32

T b I. . C ndi i n d r di c i w r d n b r S ’ rri r

Stored conditioned RAW (Estimated volume for disposal, m3)

Country RAW 2023 2030 2050 Volume [Date]

Austria

VLLW - - - -

LLW 2 523 3 130 3 510 3 500 [2045]

ILW 52 67 100 100 [2045]

HLW - - - -

Belgium

VLLW - - - -

LLW 16 880 - - 57 600 [2130]

ILW 9 351 - - 10 100 [2130]

HLW 70 - - 70 [2130]

Bulgaria

VLLW 5 772 42 000 - -

LLW 13 786 90 200 - -

ILW 0 10 - -

HLW 0 1 100 - -

Croatia

VLLW - - - -

LLW 7.53 - - -

ILW 3.81 - - -

HLW - - - -

Cyprus

VLLW - - - -

LLW - - - -

ILW - - - -

HLW - - - -

Czechia

VLLW - - - -

LLW - - - -

ILW - - - -

HLW - - - -

Denmark

VLLW - - - -

LLW - - - -

ILW - - - -

HLW - - - -

Estonia

VLLW - - - -

LLW 1 077 - - -

ILW 21 - - -

HLW - - - -

Finland

VLLW 869 - - -

LLW 1 285.95 - - -

ILW 1.05 - - -

HLW - - - -

France

VLLW 233 000 - - -

LLW 95 100 - - -

ILW 156 800 - - -

33

Stored conditioned RAW (Estimated volume for disposal, m3)

Country RAW 2023 2030 2050 Volume [Date]

HLW 4 550 - - -

Germany

VLLW - - - -

LLW 120 861 - - -

ILW 13 429 - - -

HLW - - - -

Greece

VLLW - - - -

LLW - - - -

ILW - - - -

HLW - - - -

Hungary

VLLW - 118 131 -

LLW - 295 328 -

ILW - 182 222 -

HLW - - - -

Ireland

VLLW - - - -

LLW - - - -

ILW - - - -

HLW - - - -

Italy

VLLW 4 614.9 - - -

LLW 4 070.6 - - -

ILW 529.6 - - -

HLW - - - -

Latvia

VLLW - - - -

LLW 56 78 93 -

ILW 19 14 17 -

HLW - - - -

Lithuania

VLLW 20 335 12 200 0 -

LLW 39 546 30 530 0 -

ILW 1 287 2 562 7 500 -

HLW - - -

Luxembourg

VLLW - - - -

LLW - - - -

ILW - - - -

HLW - - - -

Malta

VLLW - - - -

LLW - - - -

ILW - - - -

HLW - - - -

The

Netherlands

VLLW - - - -

LLW 12 876 14 548 20 615 31 461 [2130]

ILW

HLW 100.2 173 201 227 [2130]

34

Stored conditioned RAW (Estimated volume for disposal, m3)

Country RAW 2023 2030 2050 Volume [Date]

Poland

VLLW - - - -

LLW 50.7 - - -

ILW 807.9 - - -

HLW - - - -

Portugal

VLLW 5.2 - - -

LLW 271.8 - - -

ILW 15.9 - - -

HLW - - - -

Romania

VLLW - - - -

LLW 13 - - -

ILW 0.44 0.44 0.66 -

HLW - - - -

Slovakia

VLLW - - - -

LLW - - - -

ILW - - - -

HLW - - - -

Slovenia

VLLW - - - -

LLW 2 419.2

- - -

ILW - - -

HLW - - - -

Spain

VLLW 8 089 6 300 11 300 0 [2100]

LLW 4 985 10 000 1 200 0 [2100]

ILW 201 300 2 700 0 [2100]

HLW 0 13 13 0 [2100]

Sweden

VLLW 5 500 3 000 1 000 -

LLW 12 700 30 000 5 000 -

ILW 12 600 15 000 10 000 -

HLW - - - -

35

Table I.4. Unconditioned radioactive waste stored on b r S ’ rri r

Stored unconditioned RAW (volume, m3 / or mass, t)16

Country Volume

RAW 2023

Storage

Estimated disposal volume

2030 2050 Volume

[Date]

Austria

VLLW - - - - -

LLW - - - - -

ILW - - - - -

HLW - - - - -

Belgium

VLLW - - - - -

LLW - - - - -

ILW - - - - -

HLW - - - - -

Bulgaria

VLLW 4 592 4 592 - - -

LLW 6 981 6 981 - - -

ILW 3 10 - - -

HLW 0 - - - -

Croatia

VLLW - - - - -

LLW - - - - -

ILW - - - - -

HLW - - - - -

Cyprus

VLLW - - - - -

LLW - - - - -

ILW - - - - -

HLW - - - - -

Czechia

VLLW - - - - -

LLW 1 366.4 m3

339 t

- - - -

ILW - - - -

HLW - - - - -

Denmark

VLLW - - - - -

LLW 5 709

- - - -

ILW - - - -

HLW - - - - -

Estonia

VLLW - - - - -

LLW - - - - -

ILW - - - - -

HLW - - - - -

Finland

VLLW - - - - -

LLW - 38 - - -

ILW 1 275 3 558.8 - - -

HLW - - - - -

16 Unless otherwise indicated, amounts without units are volumes in m3.

36

Stored unconditioned RAW (volume, m3 / or mass, t)16

Country Volume

RAW 2023

Storage

Estimated disposal volume

2030 2050 Volume

[Date]

France

VLLW - - - - -

LLW - - - - -

ILW - - - - -

HLW - - - - -

Germany

VLLW - - - - -

LLW 22 914 t - - - -

ILW 2 546 t - - - -

HLW - - - - -

Greece

VLLW 27.84 - - - -

LLW 299.53* - - - -

ILW 0.93 - - - -

HLW - - - - -

Hungary

VLLW 2 012 2 107 1 574 0 -

LLW 5 031 5 268 3 936 0 -

ILW 3 360 3 641 2 509 182 -

HLW - - - - -

Ireland

VLLW - - - - -

LLW - - - - -

ILW - - - - -

HLW - - - - -

Italy

VLLW 13 424.8 10 027.3 - - -

LLW 5 160 4 710.1 - - -

ILW 2 990 4 731.7 - - -

HLW - - - - -

Latvia

VLLW - - - - -

LLW - - - - -

ILW - - - - -

HLW - - - - -

Lithuania

VLLW - - - - -

LLW - - - - -

ILW - - - - -

HLW - - - - -

Luxembourg

VLLW - - - - -

LLW - - - - -

ILW - - - - -

HLW - - - - -

Malta

VLLW - - - - -

LLW - - - - -

ILW - - - - -

37

Stored unconditioned RAW (volume, m3 / or mass, t)16

Country Volume

RAW 2023

Storage

Estimated disposal volume

2030 2050 Volume

[Date]

HLW - - - - -

The

Netherlands

VLLW - - - - -

LLW - - - - -

ILW - - - - -

HLW - - - - -

Poland

VLLW - - - - -

LLW - - - - -

ILW - - - - -

HLW - - - - -

Portugal

VLLW - - - - -

LLW - - - - -

ILW - - - - -

HLW - - - - -

Romania

VLLW 270 m3 - - - -

LLW 1 374 m3 - 2 846.7 7 320.92 -

ILW 107.38 m3 - 226.6 506.98 -

HLW 0.13 m3 - - - -

Slovakia

VLLW 9 445.4 t 7 871 - - -

LLW

582.2 m3

5 291.4 t

7 256.6 - - -

ILW

0.85 m3

344.460 t

45.57 - - -

HLW - - - - -

Slovenia

VLLW - - - - -

LLW 31 - - - -

ILW 20.7 - - - -

HLW - - - - -

Spain

VLLW - - - - -

LLW - - - - -

ILW - - - - -

HLW - - - - -

Sweden

VLLW - - - - -

LLW - - - - -

ILW - - - - -

HLW - - - - -

* Including uncharacterised radioactive waste at NCS ‘D’ and other

facilities.

38

T b I. . Di p d r di c i w n b r S ’ rri r

Disposed RAW (Volume as disposed, m3)

Country RAW 2023 2030 2050 Other date

Austria

VLLW - - - -

LLW - - - -

ILW - - - -

HLW - - - -

Belgium

VLLW - - - -

LLW - - - -

ILW - - - -

HLW - - - -

Bulgaria

VLLW - - - -

LLW - - - -

ILW - - - -

HLW - - - -

Croatia

VLLW - - - -

LLW - - - -

ILW - - - -

HLW - - - -

Cyprus

VLLW - - - -

LLW - - - -

ILW - - - -

HLW - - - -

Czechia

VLLW - - - -

LLW 14 260.8 - - -

ILW 10 332 - - -

HLW - - - -

Denmark

VLLW - - - -

LLW - - - -

ILW - - - -

HLW - - - -

Estonia

VLLW - - - -

LLW - - - -

ILW - - - -

HLW - - - -

Finland

VLLW 0 1 400 4 600 -

LLW 9 893 16 857 19 648 -

ILW 33 82 91 -

HLW 0 - - -

France VLLW 469 000 - - -

39

Disposed RAW (Volume as disposed, m3)

Country RAW 2023 2030 2050 Other date

LLW 906 000 - - -

ILW - - - -

HLW - - - -

Germany

VLLW - - - -

LLW 76 311 - - -

ILW 8 479 - - -

HLW - - - -

Greece

VLLW - - - -

LLW - - - -

ILW - - - -

HLW - - - -

Hungary

VLLW 1 247 2 330 4 368 -

LLW 3 119 5 826 10 920 -

ILW 1 871 3 495 6 552 -

HLW - - - -

Ireland

VLLW - - - -

LLW - - - -

ILW - - - -

HLW - - - -

Italy

VLLW - - 37 073 43 385 [2065]

LLW - - 33 327 39 000 [2065]

ILW - - - -

HLW - - - -

Latvia

VLLW 0 0 - -

LLW 783 1 883 1 883 -

ILW 35 35 35 -

HLW - - - -

Lithuania

VLLW 7 651.6 21 000 53 500 -

LLW - - 114 417 -

ILW - - - -

HLW - - - -

Luxembourg

VLLW - - - -

LLW - - - -

ILW - - - -

HLW - - - -

Malta

VLLW - - - -

LLW - - - -

ILW - - - -

40

Disposed RAW (Volume as disposed, m3)

Country RAW 2023 2030 2050 Other date

HLW - - - -

The

Netherlands

VLLW - * - - -

LLW - - - -

ILW - - - -

HLW - - - -

Poland

VLLW - - - -

LLW 2 768.4 - - -

ILW 577.5 - - -

HLW - - - -

Portugal

VLLW - - - -

LLW - - - -

ILW - - - -

HLW - - - -

Romania

VLLW - - - -

LLW 2 461 - - -

ILW - - - -

HLW - - - -

Slovakia

VLLW 23 941.76 - - -

LLW 20 862.36 - - -

ILW - - - -

HLW - - - -

Slovenia

VLLW - - - -

LLW - - - -

ILW - - - -

HLW - - - -

Spain

VLLW 25 670 45 000 110 000 125 000 [2100]

LLW 36 157 46 000 90 000 94 200 [2100]

ILW - - - 3 900 [2100]

HLW - - - 13 [2100]

Sweden

VLLW 30 500 52 000 63 000 -

LLW 40 600 60 000 140 000 -

ILW 0 0 5 000 -

HLW - - - -

* No information on VLLW inventory is registered in the Netherlands.

41

Table I.6. Comparison of global European Union radioactive waste in disposal

(m3, rounded to thousands)17

Disposed 2013 2016 2019 2023 2030*

Total waste 1 279 000* 1 420 000 1 552 000 1 692 000 -

VLLW 279 000 369 000 462 000 558 000 -

LLW 987 000 1 039 000 1 067 000 1 113 000 -

ILW 12 000 12 000 22 000 21 000 -

HLW 0 0 0 0 -

* The Commission estimate is primarily based on the information reported by Member States and on the

other sources when information was not available in the fourth national reports.

17 Except for HLW, which is rounded to hundreds.

42

Table I.7. Comparison of global European Union radioactive waste and spent fuel in

storage (m3, rounded to thousands)18

Stored 2013 2016 2019 2023 2030*

Total SF 49 800 52 700 55 600 59 600 66 900

Total waste 771 000 796 000 783 000 901 000 -

VLLW 236 000 233 000 233 000 303 000 -

LLW 358 000 381 000 353 000 385 000 -

ILW 173 000 178 000 191 000 208 000 -

HLW 4 300 4 500 4 800 5 200 -

* The Commission estimate is primarily based on the information reported by Member States and on the

other sources when information was not available in the fourth national reports.

18 Except for HLW, which is rounded to hundreds.

43

Table I.8. Comparison of global European Union radioactive waste and spent fuel –

Total (m3, rounded to thousands)19

Total 2013 2016 2019 2023 2030*

Total SF 49 800 52 700 55 600 59 600 66 900

Total waste 2 050 000 2 216 000 2 334 000 2 593 000 3 204 000

VLLW 515 000 601 000 695 000 861 000 1 171 000

LLW 1 345 000 1 420 000 1 421 000 1 497 000 1 778 000

ILW 185 000 190 000 213 000 229 000 247 000

HLW 4 300 4 500 4 800 5 200 7 700

* The Commission estimate is primarily based on the information reported by Member States and on the

other sources when information was not available in the fourth national reports.

19 Except for HLW, which is rounded to hundreds.

ET ET

EUROOPA KOMISJON

Brüssel, 29.9.2026 COM(2026) 512 final

KOMISJONI ARUANNE NÕUKOGULE JA EUROOPA PARLAMENDILE

nõukogu direktiivi 2011/70/Euratom rakendamise kohta ning ülevaade ühenduse

territooriumil olevate kasutatud tuumkütuse ja radioaktiivsete jäätmete kohta ja

osutatud materjalide tekkimise tulevikuprognoos

NELJAS ARUANNE

{SWD(2026) 285 final} - {SWD(2026) 286 final}

2

1 SISSEJUHATUS ................................................................................................................. 3

2 RADIOAKTIIVSED JÄÄTMED JA KASUTATUD TUUMKÜTUS EUROOPA

LIIDUS ................................................................................................................................ 4

2.1 Radioaktiivsete jäätmete ja kasutatud tuumkütuse päritolu ....................................... 4

2.2 Ülevaates esitatud hinnangud ..................................................................................... 4

3 RADIOAKTIIVSETE JÄÄTMETE JA KASUTATUD TUUMKÜTUSE OHUTU JA

VASTUTUSTUNDLIK KÄITLEMINE............................................................................. 5

3.1 Riiklikud raamistikud ja programmid ........................................................................ 5

3.2 Pädevad asutused ........................................................................................................ 6

3.3 Ringsus- ja lõppladustamispoliitika ........................................................................... 6

3.4 Kulude hindamine ja rahastamine .............................................................................. 7

3.5 Programmi rakendamise jälgimine ja aruandlus ........................................................ 7

3.6 Läbipaistvus ja üldsuse osalemine ............................................................................. 8

4 JÄRELDUSED .................................................................................................................... 8

3

1 SISSEJUHATUS

Direktiivi 2011/70/Euratom1 (kasutatud tuumkütuse2 ja radioaktiivsete jäätmete3

vastutustundliku ja ohutu käitlemise kohta) (edaspidi „direktiiv“) artikli 14 lõike 2 alusel on

komisjon kohustatud esitama Euroopa Parlamendile ja nõukogule korrapäraselt

• aruande direktiivi rakendamisel tehtud edusammude kohta ning

• ülevaate Euroopa Aatomienergiaühenduse (edaspidi „ühendus“) territooriumil

olevate radioaktiivsete jäätmete ja kasutatud tuumkütuse kohta ning osutatud

materjalide tekkimise tulevikuprognoosi.

Esitatav teave põhineb liikmesriikide aruannetel, mis esitatakse iga kolme aasta tagant

vastavalt direktiivi artikli 14 lõikele 1; liikmesriikide viimane aruande esitamise tähtaeg oli

23. august 2024. Käesolev neljas aruanne hõlmab ajavahemikku 2021–2023. Aruandele on

lisatud kaks komisjoni talituste töödokumenti:

• ühes tutvustatakse üldist olukorda ühenduses, tuginedes komisjoni tehtud

liikmesriikide aruannete analüüsile,

• teises esitatakse ühenduse radioaktiivsete jäätmete ja kasutatud tuumkütuse ülevaade

ning tulevikuprognoos 2023. aasta detsembri seisuga.

Komisjon on juba esitanud kolm eduaruannet (2017., 2019. ja 2024. aastal), millest igaühes

antakse põhjalik ülevaade direktiivi rakendamisest. Käesolevas aruandes kirjeldatakse vaid

mõnda üksikut muutust võrreldes 2024. aasta aruandes4 kajastatud olukorraga, mistõttu jääb

enamik komisjoni järeldusi kehtima. 2025. aastal algatas komisjon kõrvuti nõukogu

direktiivi 2006/117/Euratom (radioaktiivsete jäätmete ja kasutatud tuumkütuse vedude

järelevalve ja kontrolli kohta) hindamisega direktiivi hindamise5.

2. jaos antakse ülevaade radioaktiivsete jäätmete ja kasutatud tuumkütuse varudest ühenduses.

3. jaos esitatakse kokkuvõtlik hinnang direktiivikohaste riiklike raamistike ja programmide

rakendamise hetkeseisu kohta, tuues välja hiljutised edusammud ja lahendamata probleemid.

(1) Nõukogu 19. juuli 2011. aasta direktiiv 2011/70/Euratom, millega luuakse ühenduse raamistik kasutatud tuumkütuse ja

radioaktiivsete jäätmete vastutustundlikuks ja ohutuks käitlemiseks (ELT L 199, 2.8.2011, lk 48, ELI:

http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2011/70/oj). (2) Kasutatud tuumkütus on „tuumkütus, mida on kiiritatud ning mis on reaktori südamikust jäädavalt eemaldatud“ (direktiivi artikli 3

punkt 11) ning mis ei ole selle praegusel kujul enam kasutatav. See tekib tuumareaktorite kasutamisel elektrienergia tootmiseks ning

teadus-, koolitus- ja tutvustamistegevuses. (3) Radioaktiivsed jäätmed on „gaasilises, vedelas või tahkes olekus radioaktiivne aine“, mille edasist kasutust ei nähta ette ega kaaluta

(direktiivi artikli 3 punkt 7) ning mis on liigitatud radioaktiivseteks jäätmeteks. Radioaktiivsed jäätmed tekivad elektrienergia

tootmisel tuumaelektrijaamades või radioaktiivsete materjalide kasutamisel muudes valdkondades kui energeetika, näiteks meditsiinis, teaduses, tööstuses või põllumajanduses. Direktiivis sätestatud muude oluliste mõistete (nt „ladustamine“ ja

„lõppladustamine“) määratlused leiab komisjoni talituste töödokumendist SWD(2026) 286 nõukogu direktiivi 2011/70/Euratom

rakendamisel tehtud edusammude kohta. (4) Komisjoni aruanne nõukogule ja Euroopa Parlamendile nõukogu direktiivi 2011/70/Euratom rakendamise kohta ning ülevaade

ühenduse territooriumil olevate kasutatud tuumkütuse ja radioaktiivsete jäätmete kohta ja osutatud materjalide tekkimise

tulevikuprognoos – kolmas aruanne, https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/documents-register/detail?ref=COM(2024)197&lang=et.

(5) Hindamisprotsess hõlmas ka tagasisidekorjet ja avalikku konsultatsiooni (2026. aastal), vt https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-

regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/14619-Radioaktiivsete-jaatmete-direktiiv-ja-vedude-direktiiv-hindamine_et.

4

2 RADIOAKTIIVSED JÄÄTMED JA KASUTATUD TUUMKÜTUS EUROOPA

LIIDUS

2.1 Radioaktiivsete jäätmete ja kasutatud tuumkütuse päritolu

Radioaktiivseid jäätmeid tekitavad mitmesuguse tegevusega – alates meditsiiniseadmete

kasutamisest kuni elektrienergia tootmiseni – kõik liikmesriigid. Lõviosa radioaktiivsetest

jäätmetest tekib tuumaelektrijaamades ja asjaomase tuumkütusetsükliga seotud tegevuse

käigus, väiksemas koguses radioaktiivseid jäätmeid tekib radioaktiivsete materjalide

kasutamisel muudes valdkondades kui energeetika.

Iga liikmesriik määrab ise kindlaks oma elektrienergiaallikate jaotuse. 2023. aastal tegutsesid

tuumaelektrijaamad 12 riigis6. Kolm riiki – Saksamaa, Itaalia ja Leedu – olid oma

tuumaenergiaprogrammi lõpetanud ja dekomisjoneerisid oma tuumarajatisi.

2023. aastal oli kasutusel 101 tuumareaktorit,7 74 tuumareaktorit olid lõplikult suletud ja neid

dekomisjoneeriti ning kolm tuumareaktorit olid täielikult dekomisjoneeritud. Lisaks tegutses

12 riigis8 30 uurimisreaktorit.

Kasutatud tuumkütust käitlevad praegu oma territooriumil 17 liikmesriiki.

Tuumaelektrijaamade dekomisjoneerimine on Euroopa tuumatööstuse jaoks väga oluline

tegevus. Tuumarajatisi dekomisjoneeritakse praegu veerandis liikmesriikides ja

dekomisjoneerimisel tekkivate radioaktiivsete jäätmete kogus üha suureneb.

2.2 Ülevaates esitatud hinnangud

2023. aasta lõpuks oli radioaktiivsete jäätmete hinnanguline kogus ELis 2 593 000 m3 (mis

tähendab keskmiselt alla 65 000 m3 aastas ja 11 % suurust kasvu pärast eelmist

aruandeperioodi). Ülevaade radioaktiivsete jäätmete kogusest 2023. aastal võrreldes

2019. aastaga on esitatud tabelis 1. Ligikaudu 66 % (1 692 000 m3) neist jäätmetest oli

lõppladustatud ning 34 % (901 000 m3) ladustatud ja vajas edasist käitlemist. 2023. aasta

lõpuks moodustasid 99,5 % ELi radioaktiivsete jäätmete üldkogusest tuumaenergiaprogrammi

omava 15 liikmesriigi radioaktiivsed jäätmed9.

Enamik liikmesriike esitas radioaktiivsete jäätmete ülevaate, kasutades Rahvusvahelise

Aatomienergiaagentuuri (IAEA) ohutusjuhendis GSG-1 sisalduvat klassifitseerimissüsteemi,10

või esitas maatriksid, mis võimaldavad teisendada andmed nende riiklikust

klassifikatsioonisüsteemist IAEA soovitatud klassifikatsioonisüsteemi. Samuti esitas enamik

riike oma ülevaates ühtlustatud andmeid, mille on määranud üheskoos kindlaks komisjon,

IAEA ja OECD Tuumaenergia Agentuur.

(6) Belgia, Bulgaaria, Tšehhi, Soome, Prantsusmaa, Ungari, Madalmaad, Rumeenia, Slovakkia, Sloveenia, Hispaania ja Rootsi. Peale

selle – ehkki Horvaatia enda territooriumil ühtki tuumaelektrijaama ei ole – on Horvaatia koos Sloveeniaga Krško

tuumaelektrijaama kaasomanik. (7) Vt IAEA tuumareaktorite teabesüsteem aadressil https://www.iaea.org/pris.

(8) Vt IAEA uurimisreaktorite andmebaas aadressil https://nucleus.iaea.org/rrdb/home#/home.

(9) Belgia, Bulgaaria, Tšehhi, Soome, Prantsusmaa, Saksamaa, Ungari, Itaalia, Leedu, Madalmaad, Rumeenia, Slovakkia, Sloveenia,

Hispaania ja Rootsi. (10) „Classification of Radioactive Waste. General Safety Guide“ (Radioaktiivsete jäätmete klassifikatsioon. Üldine ohutusjuhend),

IAEA, Viin, 2009.

5

Andmete põhjal tundub, et riikides, kus lõppladustatakse väga väikese radioaktiivsusega ja

madalaktiivseid radioaktiivseid jäätmeid, kulgeb protsess jäätmete tekkest kuni jäätmete

lõppladustamiseni sujuvalt. Keskmise radioaktiivsusega jäätmete, kõrgaktiivsete

radioaktiivsete jäätmete ja kasutatud tuumkütuse puhul see nii ei ole, kuna praegu puuduvad

nende käitlemiseks toimivad lõppladustamisrajatised.

Tabel 1. Radioaktiivsete jäätmete kogus ELis 2019. ja 2023. aastal

Jäätmed ELi radioaktiivsete jäätmete kogus (m3, ümardatud

tuhandeteni*)

Klass Ladustatud Lõppladustatud Kokku

Aasta 2019 2023 2019 2023 2019 2023

Väga väikese

radioaktiivsusega

jäätmed

233 000 303 000 462 000 558 000 695 000 861 000

Madalaktiivsed

radioaktiivsed

jäätmed

353 000 381 000 1 068 000 1 109 000 1 421 000 1 491 000

Keskmise

radioaktiivsusega

jäätmed

191 000 211 000 22 000 25 000 213 000 236 000

Kõrgaktiivsed

radioaktiivsed

jäätmed

4 800 5 200 0 0 4 800 5 200

Kokku (m3) 782 000 901 000 1 552 000 1 692 000 2 334 000 2 593 000

* Välja arvatud kõrgaktiivsete radioaktiivsete jäätmete kogused, mis on ümardatud sadadeni.

2023. aasta lõpuks oli ladustatud ELis ligikaudu 59 500 raskmetalli tonni kasutatud

tuumkütust (umbes 6 % rohkem kui 2019. aastal). Kogu ELi kasutatud tuumkütus on praegu

ladustatud, kuna maailmas ei tegutse ühtki tsiviilotstarbelist kasutatud tuumkütuse

lõppladustamise rajatist. Väike kogus kasutatud tuumkütust saadetakse endiselt

ümbertöötamisele väljapoole ELi, seega on oodata ümbertöötamisel tekkivate radioaktiivsete

jäätmete tagasi saatmist hiljemalt järgmistel kümnenditel.

3 RADIOAKTIIVSETE JÄÄTMETE JA KASUTATUD TUUMKÜTUSE OHUTU

JA VASTUTUSTUNDLIK KÄITLEMINE

3.1 Riiklikud raamistikud ja programmid

Riiklikud raamistikud on kõikjal ELis viimastel aastatel üldiselt jätkuvalt paranenud. Selle

positiivse arengu üheks liikumapanevaks jõuks on enesehindamine, mida tugevdab

rahvusvaheline vastastikune eksperdihindamine.

Üks peamisi direktiivist tulenevaid kohustusi on töötada välja riiklik programm – riiklik

strateegiline (tegevus)kava, milles sätestatakse, kuidas rakendatakse või hakatakse rakendama

riiklikku poliitikat. Riiklik programm on olemas kõigil liikmesriikidel ja liikmesriigid

6

arendavad neid pidevalt edasi. Aruandeperioodil teavitasid komisjoni oma ajakohastatud

riiklikust programmist 11 liikmesriiki. Paraku esines ka seda, et liikmesriik ei vaadanud oma

programmi läbi ega ajakohastanud seda nii korrapäraselt, nagu on ette nähtud tema

riigisisestes õigusaktides. Riiklike programmide pidev rakendamine ja vajaduse korral kiire

ajakohastamine on märk radioaktiivsete jäätmete ja kasutatud tuumkütuse vastutustundlikust

käitlemisest. Liikmesriigid peavad sellega seoses optimeerima planeerimist, eraldama

piisavad vahendid, viima läbi vajalikud teadusuuringud ja koolitused ning tagama üldsuse ja

muude sidusrühmade kaasamise.

Ühtki direktiivi ülevõtmise või riikliku raamistikuga seotud kestvat rikkumist praegu ei ole.

Samas tuli komisjonil algatada eelmistes aruandlustsüklites mõne liikmesriigi suhtes mitu

menetlust, mis puudutasid direktiivi rakendamist ja riikliku programmi vastavust direktiivi

nõuetele. 2025. aasta lõpus oli pooleli 16 rikkumismenetlust11.

3.2 Pädevad asutused

Riiklikes aruannetes esitatud teabest on näha, et pädevad reguleerivad asutused on tehniliselt

ja rahaliselt sõltumatud.

Riiklike programmide ohutuks ja tõhusaks rakendamiseks on oluline, et reguleerivatel

asutustelt on piisavalt töötajaid. Hiljuti taas tärganud huvi tuumaenergiaprojektide vastu ja

suurenenud investeeringud nendesse projektidesse tähendab, et liikmesriigid peavad

ennetavalt tugevdama oma pädevaid asutusi, sealhulgas radioaktiivsete jäätmete ja kasutatud

tuumkütuse ohutuks käitlemiseks. Komisjon on esitanud viimases tuumaenergia

näidisprogrammis12 uute reaktorite ja pikaajalise käitamisega seotud vajaduste analüüsi, võttes

arvesse, et liikmesriikidel on erinevad haldustavad.

3.3 Ringsus- ja lõppladustamispoliitika

Tekitatavate radioaktiivsete jäätmete ja lõppladustatavate radioaktiivsete jäätmete kogus

peaks olema nii väike kui mõistlikult võimalik. Käimasoleva dekomisjoneerimistegevuse

puhul on eriti ilmsed sellised võimalused nagu materjalide vabastamine regulatiivsest

kontrollist ja nende hilisem korduskasutamine või ringlussevõtt.

Kuigi enamik liikmesriike kavatseb lõppladustada radioaktiivseid jäätmeid ja kasutatud

tuumkütust oma territooriumil, ei ole kõik neist teinud lõplikku otsust ja mõned kaaluvad ikka

veel ühiseid rahvusvahelisi lõppladustamise lahendusi. Komisjon viis ellu katseprojekti

„Ettepanek radioaktiivsete jäätmete suhtes kohaldatava Euroopa ühise lähenemisviisi

kohta“,13 kaasates foorumi loomisse võimalikult palju riiklikke ametiasutusi, et arutada

võimalikke ühiseid jäätmekäitluslahendusi Euroopas.

(11) Austria, Belgia, Bulgaaria, Taani, Saksamaa, Eesti, Iirimaa, Kreeka, Horvaatia, Itaalia, Läti, Leedu, Madalmaade, Portugali

Rumeenia ja Sloveenia suhtes. (12) Komisjoni 10. märtsi 2026. aasta teatis „Euratomi asutamislepingu artikli 40 kohaselt esitatud tuumaenergia näidisprogramm –

lõplik versioon (pärast Euroopa Majandus- ja Sotsiaalkomitee arvamuse saamist), COM(2026) 120 final, https://eur-

lex.europa.eu/legal-content/ET/TXT/?uri=celex:52026DC0120.

(13) Euroopa Parlamendi liikmete algatusel lisati katseprojekti rahastamine ELi eelarvesse, vt

https://energy.ec.europa.eu/document/download/b74f0a8f-ef96-45ce-8301-

5c8d86b9c5d1_en?filename=C_2023_4577_1_EN_annexe_acte_autonome_nlw_part1_v1.pdf.

7

Liikmesriigid, kellel on tuumaenergiaprogramm, kavatsevad lõppladustada oma kasutatud

tuumkütuse sügaval asuvatesse geoloogilistesse rajatistesse. Mõni riik töötab oma kasutatud

tuumkütust ümber, teised on selle võimaluse endale varuks jätnud.

Esimene kasutatud tuumkütuse lõppladustamise rajatis peaks alustama tegevust Soomes

2027. aastaks. Rootsis ja Prantsusmaal on käimas sarnaste rajatiste ehitamiseks

investeerimisprojektid, mis viiakse eeldatavasti lõpule järgmisel kümnendil. Võrreldes

eelmise aruandega teeb rohkem liikmesriike aktiivselt tööd erinevates sügaval asuvate

geoloogiliste rajatiste ettevalmistamise etappides. Kõrgaktiivsete radioaktiivsete jäätmete ja

kasutatud tuumkütuse sügaval asuvate geoloogiliste hoidlate kavandatud kasutuselevõtu

kuupäevad jäävad enamjaolt vahemikku 2050–2075.

3.4 Kulude hindamine ja rahastamine

Peaaegu kõik liikmesriigid esitasid teabe oma riikliku programmi kulude hindamise kohta.

2023. aastal oli radioaktiivsete jäätmete ja kasutatud tuumkütuse käitlemise hinnanguline

kogukulu14 ELis ligikaudu 300 miljardit eurot, mis on kooskõlas komisjoni varasemate

aruannetega.

Riikide hinnangud on metoodika, eelduste, andmete täielikkuse, ulatuse ja hõlmatud

ajavahemiku poolest väga erinevad, kuna riikide erinevad olud nõuavad erinevaid

lähenemisviise. Suurema läbipaistvuse ja rahastamiskindluse saavutamiseks teeb komisjon

tuumavaldkonna lõppfaasi finantsaspektide eksperdirühma15 kaudu liikmesriikidega koostööd,

et anda suuniseid radioaktiivsete jäätmete ja kasutatud tuumkütuse käitlemise riiklike

programmide kuluaruandluse kohta.

Enamik liikmesriike esitas teavet ka riiklike programmide rakendamiseks kehtestatud

rahastamiskavade kohta, kus võetakse arvesse kasutatud tuumkütuse ja radioaktiivsete

jäätmete tekitajate vastutust. Neis kavades on märkimisväärseid erinevusi: mõni liikmesriik

tugineb elektritoodangu põhjal kogutavale tasule, mõni jäätmete omadustel põhinevatele

maksetele, mõni riigieelarvele.

Kuna kulud tekkivad tavaliselt alles pärast radioaktiivsete materjalide või tuumkütuse

kasutamist – mõnel juhul aastakümneid hiljem –, tuleb uue tuumaenergiaalase tegevuse

varajases etapis arvesse võtta lõppfaasi kulusid. Komisjon juhib tuumaenergia

näidisprogrammis tähelepanu sellele, et selleks, et tagada ohutus ja jätkuv avalik toetus

tuumaenergia kasutamisele, on väga oluline valitsuste pühendumus ning jäätmetekitajate

poolne piisav rahastamine tõhusaks dekomisjoneerimiseks ning radioaktiivsete jäätmete ja

kasutatud tuumkütuse vastutustundlikuks käitlemiseks.

3.5 Programmi rakendamise jälgimine ja aruandlus

Mitu liikmesriiki on teinud edusamme peamiste tulemusnäitajate kasutamisel riikliku

(14) „Radioaktiivsete jäätmete käitlemise hinnanguline kogukulu“ on kõigi ELi liikmesriikide selliste kulude kogusumma, mis tekivad

seoses riikliku programmiga, mis hõlmab liikmesriigi jurisdiktsiooni alla jäävat igat liiki kasutatud tuumkütust ja radioaktiivseid

jäätmeid ning nende käitlemise kõiki etappe alates tekkimisest kuni lõppladustamiseni. (15) https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/expert-groups-register/screen/expert-groups/consult?lang=en&groupID=3777.

8

programmi rakendamise jälgimiseks. Tõhusa edusammude jälgimise ja tulemusaruandluse

tagamisega on siiski endiselt probleeme.

Aruandlus radioaktiivsete jäätmete ja kasutatud tuumkütuse käitlemise lahenduste

rakendamiseks vajaliku teadus-, arendus- ja tutvustamistegevuse kohta oli enamikul juhtudel

väga üldine. Liikmesriike kutsutakse üles esitama nende tegevuste kohta täpsemat ja

sihipärasemat teavet. Komisjonil on hea meel märkida, et enamik liikmesriike kasutab

käimasolevat radioaktiivsete jäätmete käitlemise Euroopa partnerlust16.

3.6 Läbipaistvus ja üldsuse osalemine

Liikmesriigid ei ole teatanud läbipaistvust ja üldsuse osalemist käsitlevate meetmete ja

lähenemisviiside olulisest ajakohastamisest. Komisjon kordab, kui oluline on tõhusalt

rakendada läbipaistvuse ja üldsuse osalemise nõudeid, sealhulgas esitada komisjonile aru

andes konkreetset teavet tavade kohta.

4 JÄRELDUSED

Aruandeperioodil käideldi radioaktiivseid jäätmeid ja kasutatud tuumkütust liikmesriikides

ohutult. Riiklikud raamistikud ja programmid on olemas kõikjal ELis ning need on enamasti

kehtestatud läbipaistval ja kaasaval viisil. Kõik liikmesriigid peaksid tagama, et nende riiklik

programm on ajakohane. Enesehindamise ja rahvusvahelise vastastikuse eksperdihindamise

süsteem tundus vastavat vajadustele ning ajendas jäätmekäitlust ajakohastama ja pidevalt

täiustama.

Enamiku radioaktiivsete jäätmete käitlemiseks kasutati ohutuid lahendusi (sh

lõppladustamine), mida näitab taas lõppladustatud koguste suurenemine ja ladustatud koguste

vähenemine. Enamik liikmesriike teeb tööd lõppladustamisrajatiste ehitamiseks. Paraku ei ole

mitmes riigis ikka veel radioaktiivsete jäätmete ja kasutatud tuumkütuse käitlemiseks selgelt

määratletud strateegiat ning see takistab nende edusamme.

Peamine lahendamata probleem on liikmesriikide riiklike programmide rakendamise

jälgimine ja rahastamine, mis vajab riiklike ametiasutuste tähelepanu. Kuluhinnangud on

mõnikord aegunud või ei ole piisavalt põhjalikud. See võib mõjutada rahastamiskavade

tõhusust ja tekitada ohu, et neist ei piisa tulevaste kulude katmiseks, millega pannakse

tulevastele põlvkondadele põhjendamatu koormus. Suuniste koostamisega riiklike

programmide kulude aruandluse kohta juba tegeletakse17. Siiski on veel valdkondi, kus

liikmesriikidel oleks aruannete koostamisel abiks konkreetsemad aruandluskriteeriumid.

(16) https://www.ejp-eurad.eu/.

(17) Tuumavaldkonna lõppfaasi finantsaspektide eksperdirühm (https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/expert-

groups-register/screen/expert-groups/consult?lang=en&groupID=3777) töötab välja kasutatud tuumkütuse

ja radioaktiivsete jäätmete käitlemise riikliku programmiga seotud kulude aruandlust käsitlevaid

suuniseid.

EN EN

EUROPEAN COMMISSION

Brussels, 29.9.2026 SWD(2026) 286 final

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT

Progress of implementation of Council Directive 2011/70 EURATOM

Accompanying the document

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN

PARLIAMENT

on progress of implementation of Council Directive 2011/70 EURATOM and an

inventory of radioactive waste and spent fuel present in the Community's territory and

the future prospects - FOURTH REPORT

{COM(2026) 512 final} - {SWD(2026) 285 final}

1

Contents

1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 3

2. National policies and frameworks for the safe and responsible management of radioactive

waste and spent fuel ................................................................................................................... 4

2.1. National policies ........................................................................................................ 4

2.1.1. General considerations ....................................................................................... 4

2.1.2. Import of radioactive waste and joint approaches towards radioactive waste

disposal 6

2.1.3. National policy developments............................................................................ 8

2.2. National programmes ................................................................................................. 8

2.3. National legal and organisational frameworks ........................................................ 13

2.4. Regulatory framework and competent regulatory authorities ................................. 13

2.5. Licence holders ........................................................................................................ 19

3. Implementation of national programmes ......................................................................... 23

3.1. Progress monitoring and key performance indicators (KPIs) .................................. 23

3.2. Implementation status .............................................................................................. 24

3.3. Self-assessments and international peer reviews ..................................................... 33

4. Cost assessments, financing mechanisms and available resources .................................. 37

5. Expertise, skills and R&D................................................................................................ 51

5.1. Expertise and skills .................................................................................................. 51

5.2. Research and development ...................................................................................... 51

6. Transparency and public participation ............................................................................. 53

2

List of abbreviations and acronyms

ARTEMIS Integrated review service for radioactive waste and spent fuel

management, decommissioning and remediation programmes

DGR Deep geological repository

DSRS Disused sealed radioactive source

ENSREG European Nuclear Safety Regulators Group

EU European Union

KPI Key performance indicators

HLW High-level waste

IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency

ILW Intermediate-level waste

IRRS International Regulatory Review Service

LILW Low- and intermediate-level waste

LLW Low-level waste

NORM Naturally occurring radioactive material

NPP Nuclear power plant

RAW Radioactive waste

SF Spent fuel

VLLW Very low-level waste

3

1. Introduction

This staff working document presents the Commission’s assessment of the European Union

(EU) Member States’ notifications on the implementation of Council Directive

2011/70/Euratom on the responsible and safe management of spent fuel and radioactive waste

(the ‘Directive’)1. The assessment is based on information derived from the national

programmes for the management of spent fuel and radioactive waste2 and national reports on

the implementation of the Directive3.

This document provides background information on the main findings, progress, challenges,

and trends presented in the Fourth Commission Report COM(2026) 512 to the Council and the

European Parliament on the progress of implementation of Council Directive 2011/70/Euratom

and an inventory of radioactive waste and spent fuel present in the Community’s territory and

future prospects.

All Member States had submitted their fourth national reports to the Commission by November

20244. For the first time, the deadlines for reporting under the Joint Convention5 and submitting

national reports on the implementation of the Directive to the Commission were the same

(23 August 2024). Two Member States took advantage of this opportunity and compiled a

single report to fulfil both reporting obligations. During the reporting period (2021-2024), 11

Member States notified the Commission of their updated national programmes.

1 Council Directive 2011/70/Euratom of 19 July 2011 establishing a Community framework for the

responsible and safe management of spent fuel and radioactive waste (OJ L 199, 2.8.2011, p. 48, ELI:

http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2011/70/oj). 2 Article 13(1) and Article 15(4) of the Directive. 3 Article 14(1) of the Directive. 4 As per the Directive, the deadline for submission of national report was 23 August 2024. 5 The Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste

Management. Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive

Waste Management | IAEA

4

2. National policies and frameworks for the safe and responsible

management of radioactive waste and spent fuel

The Directive’s overarching objective is to ensure the responsible and safe management of

radioactive waste and spent fuel to ‘avoid imposing undue burdens on future generations’6. To

achieve this, Member States are required to put in place and maintain national policies for the

long-term responsible and safe management of radioactive waste and spent fuel. Member States

must also put in place and maintain a national legislative, regulatory and organisational

framework for radioactive waste and spent fuel management. The framework must include the

adoption of a national programme for the implementation of national radioactive waste and

spent fuel management policies7.

2.1. National policies

2.1.1. General considerations

Each Member State bears ultimate responsibility for the management of the radioactive waste

and spent fuel it generates. It is up to the Member States to set the optimal policies based on

national circumstances and needs (e.g. whether to reprocess or dispose of spent fuel, or whether

to build a single disposal facility for all radioactive waste or several facilities for different waste

types).

All Member States have enshrined the principles set out in Article 4(3) of the Directive in their

legislation to serve as the basis of their national policies. These principles are:

• keeping the generation of radioactive waste to a minimum;

• ensuring that the interdependencies between all steps in radioactive waste and spent

fuel management are taken into account;

• ensuring the safe management of radioactive waste and spent fuel and passive safety

features for long-term safety;

• applying a graded approach to the implementation of measures for radioactive waste

and spent fuel management;

• ensuring that the costs of managing radioactive waste and spent fuel are borne by those

who generated those materials;

• applying evidence-based and documented decision-making processes at all stages of

radioactive waste and spent fuel management.

6 Article 1(1) of the Directive. 7 Article 5(1)(a) of the Directive.

5

All Member States have set out in their laws and regulations that the prime responsibility for

managing radioactive waste and spent fuel generated within their territory lies with the licence

holder. In cases where this is not feasible, such as when the licence holder has disappeared or

gone bankrupt, the Member State assumes ultimate responsibility. The practical

implementation of this principle is reflected in the obligations of licensees, including bearing

the costs of that management or setting up national waste management organisations.

Comprehensive national policies for the management of radioactive waste and spent fuel have

been put in place in most Member States. During this reporting cycle, no Member State

reported any changes its policies.

• Management of spent fuel from nuclear power plants

Nuclear fuel that has been removed from the reactor following irradiation and is no

longer usable in its present form is considered to be spent. This spent fuel requires safe

management. This typically involves initial cooling in a spent fuel pool to reduce heat

and radiation levels, followed by storage and either direct disposal or reprocessing.

Most Member States managing spent fuel have opted for a direct disposal policy, and

only a few Member States currently continue with the spent fuel reprocessing policy.

Historically, more Member States opted for reprocessing spent fuel; nevertheless, in

recent years, the trend has shifted towards direct disposal. However, despite this shift,

a few Member States have declared that they have not necessarily discarded

reprocessing as an option for the future.

Where reprocessing occurs in another country and in line with Article 4(2) of Council

Directive 2011/70/Euratom, the country of origin of the spent fuel remains responsible

for the safe and responsible disposal of the spent fuel and any resulting radioactive

waste.

• Management of spent fuel from research reactors

The most common policy for the management of spent fuel from research reactors is to

send it back to the supplier, especially in the case of highly enriched uranium fuel. When

this is not possible, spent fuel from research reactors is managed is the same way as

spent fuel from nuclear power plants.

• Management of radioactive waste

In line with international standards and practices and depending on the nature of the

radioactive waste and national circumstances, national policies for safe radioactive

waste management are centred on safe storage and disposal.

A number of countries have been exploring the possibility of putting in place joint

solutions with other countries for radioactive waste management. In 2023, the European

Parliament adopted a pilot project called a ‘Proposal for a Joint European Approach

towards Radioactive Waste’. The aim was to enable policymakers to assess, on the basis

6

of data, whether pooling European resources to deal with radioactive waste would make

sense. The Commission (Directorate-General for Energy) responded to the European

Parliament’s initiative by launching two parallel projects in 2024: (i) a compendium of

knowledge; and (ii) a consultation on a joint European approach towards radioactive

waste.

• Management of disused sealed radioactive sources

The usual policy for managing disused sealed radioactive sources is to send them back

to the supplier. When that is not possible, they are stored until suitable disposal facilities

are available or alternative management solutions are found.

Although progress is being made, there are still a few Member States that have not fully put in

place their policy to manage all their radioactive waste and spent fuel in the long term. In

general, most of those Member States have in any case taken some fundamental decisions so

that the absence of policies for some waste classes does not jeopardise the progress on their

national programmes. About half the Member States are considering the construction of new

large-scale nuclear power reactors (> 1 GWe/reactor). Notably, all countries planning to install

large-scale nuclear power reactors are also interested in small modular reactors. These planned

changes in energy policy are expected to be followed up with updates to the national

programmes.

2.1.2. Import of radioactive waste and joint approaches towards radioactive

waste disposal

Although the Directive mandates that radioactive waste be disposed of in the Member State

where it was generated, Article 4(4) of the Directive provides for exceptions under certain

conditions, which allows for disposal in another Member State or a non-EU country.

Most Member States prioritise disposing of their radioactive waste and/or spent fuel within

their own territory. However, exporting radioactive waste for disposal8 to another Member

State or a third country is an option considered by several Member States, particularly those

without a nuclear power programme or those with research reactors and relatively small

quantities of radioactive waste (RAW) and/or disused radioactive sources. While many

Member States are exploring regional or shared disposal facilities as a complementary option

to developing their own disposal solutions, approximately two thirds of Member States prohibit

the import of radioactive waste or spent fuel for disposal.

8 Disposal is defined in Article 3(3) of the Directive as ‘the emplacement of spent fuel or radioactive waste

in a facility without the intention of retrieval’.

7

Table 1 provides a broad classification of national policies on the import of radioactive waste

for disposal and the search for joint approaches to dispose of waste. These policies have

remained unchanged since the previous reporting cycle.

Table 1: Policies for radioactive waste import and joint approach towards RAW disposal9

Import for disposal(*) Joint approach towards RAW

disposal(**)

AT Not permitted Option

BE In use10 Not considered / discarded

BG Prohibited Option

HR Prohibited Option

CY Prohibited Option

CZ Prohibited Option

DK Not permitted Option

EE Prohibited Option

FI Prohibited Prohibited

FR Prohibited11 Not indicated

DE Not indicated Prohibited

EL Prohibited Option

HU Not indicated Option

IE Prohibited Prohibited

IT Not indicated Option

LV Prohibited Option

LT Prohibited Option

LU Prohibited In use10

MT Prohibited Option

NL Not permitted Not considered / discarded

PL Prohibited Option

PT Prohibited Not indicated

RO Prohibited Option

SK Prohibited Option

SI Not permitted Option

ES Not indicated Not indicated

SE Prohibited Prohibited

9 Member States’ (MS) abbreviations in this report are as follows: Austria (AT), Belgium (BE), Bulgaria

(BG), Croatia (HR), Cyprus (CY), Czechia (CZ), Denmark (DK), Estonia (EE), Finland (FI), France (FR),

Germany (DE), Greece (EL), Hungary (HU), Ireland (IE), Italy (IT), Latvia (LV), Lithuania (LT),

Luxembourg (LU), Malta (MT), The Netherlands (NL), Poland (PL), Portugal (PT), Romania (RO),

Slovakia (SK), Slovenia (SI), Spain (ES) and Sweden (SE). 10 Agreement between Luxembourg and Belgium. 11 French law prohibits the disposal of foreign radioactive waste on French territory, except for waste from

the Principality of Monaco.

8

(*) Prohibited – import for disposal explicitly prohibited by law; Not permitted – there is no explicit

prohibition, but import is still not allowed due to other regulatory or practical constraints.

(**) Option – Member State explores possibilities for joint approaches for disposal; Not considered /

discarded – Member State does not consider or discarded joint approaches for disposal.

2.1.3. National policy developments

National reports typically provide updates on the development of national policies, but

approximately one third of the reports lack detailed information on the practical

implementation of these policy principles. Furthermore, the current reporting period did not

reveal any significant changes in national policies, as indicated in the national reports.

2.2. National programmes

Member States are required to put in place national programmes for the management of

radioactive waste and spent fuel. These programmes should outline the measures, time frames

and milestones for the practical implementation of national policies. Currently, all Member

States have these national programmes.

In line with Article 11(2) of the Directive, Member States are required to regularly review and

update their national programmes. To comply with this requirement, all Member States have

set out a clear legal framework that outlines the responsibilities for reviewing, updating, and

implementing their national programmes, including specific arrangements, deadlines, and

conditions for these processes. Table 2 provides an overview of: (i) the organisations

responsible for developing national programmes in each Member State; (ii) the organisations

responsible for approving them; and (iii) the requirements for how often they need to be

reviewed and updated. However, in some cases, the same organisation is responsible for both

developing and approving the programme. This is not considered to be good practice as it may

compromise the independence and objectivity of the review process.

Approximately two thirds of Member States have incorporated a regular review cycle into their

national frameworks, specifying the time frame in which a review or update of their national

programmes should be conducted. However, despite this, some Member States have already

encountered difficulties in meeting these deadlines, primarily due to protracted or delayed

approval and adoption procedures. As of mid-2025, four Member States had failed to review

and update their national programmes within the prescribed time frame outlined in their

national legislation, highlighting the challenges in complying with prescribed schedules.

In addition to the legal requirements, infringement procedures or recommendations from

ARTEMIS peer review missions often serve as catalysts for reviewing and updating national

programmes. These review and update mechanisms play a crucial role in driving the continuous

improvement of national programmes and frameworks.

9

As regular reviews and updates of national programmes are mandatory, the Commission

expects Member States to submit their updated programmes in line with Article 13(1) of

Directive. Since 2022, 11 Member States have notified their updated national programmes (see

Figure 1), which in some cases involved changes to the overall strategy and timelines for

activities. However, in most instances, the updates resulted in the postponement of

implementation milestones by several years, largely reflecting the current delays in the

implementation of national programmes.

Some national programmes only outline activities for a specific period, typically spanning 5-

10 years. At the end of this period, Member States are expected to prepare and legally approve

an updated national programme for the subsequent period. To prevent similar issues to those

mentioned above, Member States are encouraged to optimise their planning and adoption

processes, thereby guaranteeing the continuity of their national programmes.

In general, nearly all national programmes cover all types of radioactive waste and spent fuel

generated within the Member States’ territories. Nevertheless, only about one third of the

programmes include comprehensive plans for all waste streams, from generation to disposal.

Some Member States with nuclear power plants in operation have yet to make a final decision

on the long-term management of spent fuel and continue to keep several options open, such as

shared disposal, reprocessing and direct disposal. Despite this, the default strategy for most

Member States is to proceed with the direct disposal of spent fuel.

As noted in the previous report, Member States with nuclear power programmes tend to focus

on the management of radioactive waste and spent fuel generated by the nuclear industry but

provide limited or no information on the management of institutional radioactive waste.

Unfortunately, this situation remains unchanged since the previous report, highlighting the

need for more attention to this aspect of radioactive waste management.

10

Figure 1: Timeline of releases of the latest national programmes and their expected next

reviews

Timeline in blue: as set by Member State.

Timeline in green: no period set by Member State

11

Table 2: Member State national programmes under Directive 2011/70/Euratom – Reference date: June 2023.

Organisation responsible for developing the programme Approving organisation Latest

release Review and update

AT Federal Ministry for Agriculture and Forestry, Climate and Environmental

Protection, Regions and Water Management (BMLUK)

Federal government 2022 No period set

BE Committee of the National Programme (⁕) Federal Council of Ministers 2024 No period set

BG Ministry of Energy Council of Ministers 2015 Every 5 years

HR Ministry of Interior Government 2022 No period set

CY Minister of Labour and Social Insurance (MLSI) Ministry of Industry and Trade 2015 Every 10 years

CZ Ministry of Trade and Industry Government 2019 Every 10 years

DK Danish Health Authority Ministry of the Interior and

Health

2020 No period set

EE Ministry of Climate Ministry of Climate 2019 Every 10 years

FI The Ministry of Economic Affairs and Employment and the Ministry of Social

Affairs and Health

Ministry of Economic Affairs

and Employment

2022 Every 10 years

FR Working group (GT PNGMDR) (⁕⁕⁕) Ministry of Ecological

Transition

2022 Every 5 years

DE Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Nuclear Safety and

Consumer Protection

Federal Cabinet 2015 No period set

EL Greek Atomic Energy Commission (EEAE) Minister of Development and

Investments

2023 At least every 10

years

HU Ministry of Energy Government 2016 Every 5 years

IE Department of Environment, Climate and Communication Government 2021 No period set

IT Ministry of the Ecological Transition Government 2019 Every 3 years

LV Ministry of Environmental Protection and Regional Development Council of Ministers 2021 Every 7 years

LT Ministry of Energy Government 2021 Every 10 years

LU Minister of Health and Social Security Minister of Health and Social

Security

2015 No period set

MT Radiation Protection Commission Radiation Protection

Commission

2022 No period set

NL Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management Parliament 2016 Every 10 years

12

Organisation responsible for developing the programme Approving organisation Latest

release Review and update

PL Ministry of Energy Council of Ministers 2020 Every 8 years

PT

Portuguese Environment Agency (APA) Council of Ministers 2022 First update in 5

years, then every 10

years

RO Nuclear and Radioactive Waste Agency (ANDR) Government 2022 At least every 5

years

SK National Nuclear Fund Government 2015 Every 6 years

SI Slovenian Nuclear Safety Administration (SNSA) (⁕⁕⁕⁕) National Assembly 2023 Every 10 years

ES National radioactive waste company (ENRESA) (⁕⁕) Council of Ministers 2023 No period set

SE Swedish Radiation Safety Authority (SSM) Ministry of Environment 2021 Every 10 years

(⁕) Comprised of representatives from the Federal Public Service responsible for Energy, the Belgian Agency for Radioactive Waste and Enriched Fissile Materials

(ONDRAF/NIRAS) and Synatom.

(⁕⁕) The legal basis requires the national radioactive waste company (ENRESA) to submit a draft update of the programme to the Ministry for the Environmental Transition

and the Demographic Challenge every 4 years or whenever so required by the Ministry.

(⁕⁕⁕) Led jointly by the Ministry for Energy and the French Authority for Nuclear Safety and Radiation Protection (ASNR).

(⁕⁕⁕⁕) ARAO provides the expert basis for the revision of the programme and based on this, SNSA prepares a draft national programme that is adopted by National

Assembly.

13

2.3. National legal and organisational frameworks

In line with Article 5(1) of the Directive, Member States are required to draw up and maintain

a comprehensive national legislative, regulatory, and organisational framework (the ‘national

framework’) for the management of radioactive waste and spent fuel. This framework must

clearly allocate responsibilities and provide for effective coordination between the relevant

competent bodies.

The Directive also required Member States to complete its transposition by 23 August 2013.

In the previous report12, it was noted that following a conformity assessment, the Commission

had identified five Member States with incomplete transposition. However, all these Member

States have since taken additional measures to ensure full compliance, and as a result all

infringement procedures on the incorrect transposition of the Directive have been closed.

In their fourth national reports, Member States provided an overview of the legal arrangements

and provisions that comprise their national framework, accompanied by a general summary of

the issues addressed in the updated arrangements. While some Member States provided

detailed information on the practical implementation of these legal provisions, others merely

listed new or amended legal acts without elaborating on their specific impact. For instance, it

was not always clear whether these changes affected the allocation of responsibilities or the

coordination between relevant competent bodies. Nevertheless, the national legal and

organisational frameworks in Member States with nuclear programmes are generally well-

established and advanced, likely due to the fact that relevant national laws were enacted before

the Directive.

Most Member States’ national frameworks incorporate provisions for updating and improving

the national framework, as required by Article 5(2) of the Directive, and clearly set out the

responsibilities of stakeholders. In general, the improvement of national frameworks is

primarily driven by international peer reviews.

All Member States have enacted laws or regulations that mandate the consideration of

operating experience, insights gained from decision-making processes, and advancements in

technology and research. However, despite this legal framework, most Member States failed

to provide sufficient details on how they actually integrate operating experience and research

findings into the development and review of their national frameworks in practice.

2.4. Regulatory framework and competent regulatory authorities

In line with the Directive’s requirements, Member States have established and maintain a

competent regulatory authority responsible for ensuring the safety of radioactive waste and

spent fuel management. As shown in Table 3, all Member States have designated national

12 Commission staff working document, Progress of implementation of Council Directive

2011/70/EURATOM, SWD(2024) 123 final.

14

competent authorities. While the majority of Member States have opted for a single competent

authority, others have established two or more organisations with distinct powers and

regulatory functions in different aspects of radioactive waste and spent fuel management. In

some cases, such as in Germany, regional regulatory authorities co-exist with federal or

national ones. However, the Commission has observed that the national reports lack sufficient

information on local or regional competent authorities responsible for radioactive waste

management, where applicable.

To improve regulatory supervision, four Member States have implemented changes to their

competent regulatory authorities during the reporting period. These changes include

establishing new authorities, reorganising existing ones, and consolidating functions, all aimed

at strengthening regulatory oversight.

• Functional independence

In line with Article 6 of the Directive, the regulatory Authority must maintain functional

separation from any other body or organisation involved in promoting or using nuclear

energy or radioactive material, or in managing radioactive waste and spent fuel.

Furthermore, the authority must possess legal powers, as well as sufficient human and

financial resources to discharge its obligations effectively.

Most Member States have declared the independence of their regulatory authorities

from organisations or bodies: (i) promoting or using nuclear energy; and (ii) managing

radioactive waste and spent fuel. In most cases, this functional or administrative

independence is enshrined in national law. The regulatory authority may be embedded

in a ministry or operate as an autonomous body, reporting to the national parliament,

council of ministries or government.

The majority of Member States have successfully demonstrated the functional

independence of their competent regulatory authorities. Since the previous Commission

report, two Member States have implemented specific measures to ensure and

strengthen the functional independence of their competent regulatory authorities. In

general, regulatory authorities in countries without nuclear power programmes tend to

be part of the central state administration and are typically small in size, proportionate

to the scale of the inventories of managed radioactive waste.

• Technical and financial capacity

In addition to functional and administrative independence, a regulatory authority’s

effective independence relies on its technical and financial capacity to fulfil its

responsibilities. Most Member States’ national reports provided information on the

measures in place to ensure technical and financial independence, such as guaranteeing

adequate human resources and funding through legislation, and charging fees to

licensees. However, only six Member States have provided clear or partial information

in their national reports on the actual financial resources available to their competent

15

regulatory authorities. To improve transparency and accountability, Member States are

encouraged to provide more comprehensive reporting on the financial resources

allocated to radioactive waste management in their future national reports.

• Human resources

The national reports of 23 Member States provided information on the human resources

of the competent authority, including the actual number of staff. By contrast, the other

Member States offered limited or no information, with some simply stating that

resources were sufficient without providing further details. In a few cases, Member

States only reported the number of positions allocated to the regulatory authority,

without indicating how many were filled. Despite maintaining stable overall staff

numbers since the last reporting period, a few Member States expressed concerns about

the high staff turnover rate. This creates challenges in preserving knowledge, training

new staff and building expertise.

However, staffing requirements for carrying out regulatory functions were often not

clearly specified, making it difficult to assess the adequacy of human resources on the

basis of the information provided. Furthermore, most Member States reported the total

number of staff in the regulatory authority without specifying the number of employees

directly involved in the safety of radioactive waste and spent fuel management

activities. This distinction is important, as a high overall staff number does not

necessarily guarantee sufficient human resources are allocated to these specific

activities.

During the reporting period, staff numbers remained stable or slightly increased in most

Member States. Nevertheless, these increases do not necessarily indicate an

improvement in the regulatory authority’s human resources situation, as they may have

followed staff cuts or recruitment freezes. Therefore, the actual impact of these changes

on the authority’s capacity to regulate safety effectively is unclear.

It is of note that, in several instances, the national reports submitted under the Joint

Convention provided more detailed information about the competent regulatory

authorities than the reports on the implementation of the Directive.

In summary, all Member States face challenges in maintaining adequate human resources in

the long term, a concern that has been confirmed by recent ARTEMIS peer review missions.

While progress has been made, further efforts are needed to demonstrate the technical

independence of competent regulatory authorities, particularly in Member States without

nuclear power programmes.

Most Member States (around three quarters) provided information on staff competence, the

availability of technical support organisations or expert support, and the mechanisms in place

16

to maintain staff competence. However, a few Member States did not report any information

on staff competence or the mechanisms for maintaining it. Additionally, some Member States

provided details on the appointment and dismissal processes for regulatory authority

management, aiming to demonstrate that management is shielded from undue influence in

carrying out its mission.

17

Table 3: National competent authorities for radioactive waste and spent fuel

management (⁕)

Competent authority Reporting to Staff (year)

AT

Federal Ministry for Climate Action, the

Environment, Energy, Mobility, Innovation and

Technology (BMK)

Federal government ~20 (2023)

BE Federal Agency for Nuclear Control (FANC) Minister of Internal Affairs and

Security ~150 (2024)

BG Nuclear Regulatory Agency (BNRA) Council of Ministers 114 (2024)

HR Civil Protection Directorate of Ministry of

Interior Ministry of Interior Planned 30 (2024)

CY Radiation Inspection and Control Service of

Ministry of Labour and Social Insurance Ministry of Labour and Social

Insurance 6 (2024)

CZ State Office for Nuclear Safety (SUJB) Prime Minister 218 (2023)

DK Danish Health Authority Ministry of the Interior and Health No data

Danish Emergency Management Agency Ministry of Resilience and

Preparedness

No data

EE Environmental Board Ministry of the Climate 18 (in the Radiation

Safety Department,

2024)

FI

Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority

(STUK) Ministry of Social Affairs and

Health ~300 (189 related to

radioactive waste

and spent fuel

management, 2024)

FR French Authority for Nuclear Safety and

Radiation Protection (ASNR) Parliament 2270 (2025)

DE

Federal Office for Radiation Protection (BfS) Federal Ministry for the

Environment, Nature Conservation,

Nuclear Safety and Consumer

Protection

No data

Federal Office for the Safety of Nuclear Waste

Management (BASE) Federal Ministry for the

Environment, Nature Conservation,

Nuclear Safety and Consumer

Protection

No data

Federal states (Länder) Federal government No data

EL Greek Atomic Energy Commission (EEAE) Minister of Development 69 (2024)

HU Hungarian Atomic Energy Authority (HAEA) Prime minister 211 (2024)

IE Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Government No data

IT National Inspectorate for Nuclear Safety and

Radiation Protection (ISIN) Government and Parliament 83 (2024)

[resources for 90]

LV Radiation Safety Centre of the State

Environmental Service (VVD RDC) Ministry of Environmental

Protection and Regional

Development

No data

LT State Nuclear Power Safety Inspectorate

(VATESI) Cabinet of Government and the

President 54 (2024)

Radiation Protection Centre (RPC) Ministry of Health 60 (2024)

18

Competent authority Reporting to Staff (year)

LU Radiation Protection Division of Ministry of

Health and Social Security (RDP) Minister of Health and Social

Security 15 (2024)

MT Radiation Protection Commission (RPC) Office of the Prime Minister 5 (2024) + 2 more

planned

NL Authority for Nuclear Safety and Radiation

Protection (ANVS) Ministry of Infrastructure and

Water Management 159 (2024)

PL National Atomic Energy Agency (PAA) Minister for Climate and

Environment 147 (2023)

[incl. 24 inspectors]

PT

Portuguese Environment Agency (APA) Ministry of Environment and

Energy 20 (2024)

General Inspection of Agriculture, Sea,

Environment and Spatial Planning

(IGAMAOT)

Direct administration exercised

jointly by Minister of the Economy

and Territorial Cohesion, Minister

of Environment and Energy,

Minister of Agriculture and

Maritime Affairs

15 (2023)

RO National Commission for Nuclear Activities

Control (CNCAN) Prime Minister 70 (2024)

SK Nuclear Regulatory Authority (ÚJD SR) Government and subsequently to

the National Council 134 (2024)

Public Health Authority (ÚVZ SR) Ministry of Health 40 (2020)

SI

Slovenian Nuclear Safety Administration

(URSJV) Ministry of Natural Resources and

Spatial Planning 43 (2024)

Slovenian Radiation Protection Administration

(URSVS) Ministry of Health No data

ES

Nuclear Safety Council (CSN) Parliament 432/210 (2023) – [Total staff / nuclear

safety and radiological

protection staff]

SE Swedish Radiation Safety Authority (SSM) Ministry of Climate and Enterprise 295 (2024)

(⁕) The data does not include staff of separate technical support organisations that exist in some Member States.

19

2.5. Licence holders

Under Article 7 of the Directive, licence holders bear primary responsibility for ensuring the

safe management of radioactive waste and spent fuel in Member States.

The national reports submitted by Member States provided limited information on the

implementation of Article 7, typically consisting of a brief summary of the relevant legal

requirements without any elaboration on their practical implementation, particularly during the

reporting period. Only the reporting on matters related to Articles 7(2) and 7(3) of the Directive

was more detailed. More than half the Member States provided information on regular safety

reviews and safety improvements, as well as on safety assessments conducted during the

reporting period.

• Human and financial resources

Most Member States reported that licence holders are legally obliged to provide and

maintain adequate financial and human resources to fulfil their safety obligations

relating to radioactive waste and spent fuel management. However, in most cases, this

information was not accompanied by details of the actual human and financial resources

available to licence holders, nor was there any information on how these resources have

evolved over time. Only a few Member States provided specific details on the status of

human resources, such as staff numbers. In some instances, general information was

provided on competence and skills management, which was often linked to Article 8,

while financial data was mostly referenced in relation to Article 12(1)(k). As a result, it

is difficult to determine whether Member States have effectively ensured that licence

holders have sufficient human and financial resources in place to meet their safety

obligations.

• Waste management organisations

A common feature among Member States is the presence of dedicated radioactive waste

management organisations, with all nuclear power and most non-nuclear power

Member States having such bodies in place. The list of radioactive waste management

organisations in the EU as of mid-2025 is provided in Table 4. These organisations are

typically public bodies, although there are some exceptions where they have been set

up by nuclear power plant operators. In both cases, the funding of radioactive waste and

spent fuel management activities is based on the ‘polluter pays’ principle, where those

who generate radioactive waste and spent fuel are responsible for covering the

associated costs. Some of these organisations also oversee the decommissioning of

shutdown nuclear installations. In certain cases, responsibility for a disposal facility is

transferred to the Member State after the facility’s closure.

The responsibilities of these waste management organisations vary across Member

States. In some cases, they are responsible for both predisposal and disposal activities,

ensuring a comprehensive approach to radioactive waste management. In other cases,

20

these organisations are only responsible for predisposal activities, such as storage and

treatment, or for disposal activities, such as operating a geological repository. Limited

responsibility for specific types of activities may be a result of a waste management

strategy that has not yet been fully developed. For example, a lack of a disposal strategy

is likely to result in responsibilities for disposal activities not clearly being assigned.

Since the publication of the third Commission report, there have been no significant

changes regarding the licence holders.

21

Table 4: Radioactive waste management organisations in the EU

Radioactive waste management organisation Type Responsibilities

AT Nuclear Engineering Seibersdorf GmbH (NES) Public/private Management of radioactive waste and decommissioning.

BE

Belgian Agency for Radioactive Waste and Enriched Fissile

Materials (ONDRAF/NIRAS)

Public Managing radioactive waste and spent fuel when declared as

radioactive waste. Responsible for establishment of long-term

solution for radioactive waste.

BG State Enterprise for Radioactive Waste (SERAW) Public Management of radioactive waste and spent fuel and

decommissioning.

CZ

Radioactive Waste Repository Authority (SÚRAO) Public Management of radioactive waste and spent fuel. Operation of LLW

disposal facilities. Development of deep geological disposal facility

for HLW and spent fuel.

DE

Federal Company for Radioactive Waste Disposal (BGE) Public/private

(⁕)

Responsible for establishment of disposal solutions.

Federal Company for Radioactive Waste Storage (BGZ) Private (†) Management of storage facilities of radioactive waste and spent fuel.

DK

Danish Decommissioning (DD) Public Management of radioactive waste and decommissioning.

Responsible for establishment of long-term solution for radioactive

waste and spent fuel.

EE

AS ALARA Public Management of radioactive waste and decommissioning.

Responsible for establishment of long-term solution for radioactive

waste.

ES

National radioactive waste company (ENRESA) Public (‡) Management of radioactive waste and spent fuel. Decommissioning

nuclear plants. Disposal of VLLW and LLW. Responsible for

establishment of disposal solution for ILW, HLW and spent fuel.

FI POSIVA Private (⁑) Responsible for disposal of spent fuel generated by its owners.

FR

National agency for management of radioactive waste

(ANDRA)

Public Management of radioactive waste and spent fuel. Disposal of VLLW

and LLW. Responsible for establishment of disposal solution for ILW

and HLW.

HR

The Fund for the Financing of the Decommissioning and Disposal

of Radioactive Waste and Spent Nuclear Fuel from Krško Nuclear

Power Plant

Public Coordination, preparation and development of the programme for

decommissioning the Krško NPP and the programme for the disposal

of radioactive waste from the Krško NPP.

HU Public Limited Company for Radioactive Waste Management

(PURAM)

Public Management of radioactive waste and spent fuel. Decommissioning

nuclear plants. Disposal of LLW and ILW.

22

Radioactive waste management organisation Type Responsibilities

IT

Company for the Nuclear Installations Management (SOGIN) Public Management of all radioactive waste and spent fuel.

Decommissioning of nuclear facilities. Responsible for establishment

of the disposal solution.

LT

State Enterprise Ignalina Nuclear Power Plant (INPP) Public Management of all radioactive waste and spent fuel.

Decommissioning of nuclear facilities. Disposal facility for VLLW.

Responsible for establishment of the disposal solution.

LV Latvian Environment, Geology and Meteorology Centre

(LEGMC)

Public Management of radioactive waste, disposal.

NL Central Organisation for Radioactive Waste (COVRA) Public Management of radioactive waste and spent fuel.

PL Radioactive Waste Management Plant (ZUOP) Public Management of radioactive waste, disposal of LLW.

PT Instituto Superiore Tecnico (IST) Public Management of radioactive waste.

RO Nuclear and Radioactive Waste Agency (ANDR) Public Coordination of the safe management of radioactive waste and spent

nuclear fuel.

SE

Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Company (SKB) Private (⁑) Management of radioactive waste and spent fuel. Disposal of LLW.

Responsible for establishment of the disposal solution for ILW, HLW

and spent fuel.

SI

Agency for Radwaste Management (ARAO) Public Collecting, transporting, treating, storing and disposing of LLW and

ILW and for the disposal of HLW. Management of the closed uranium

mine.

SK Nuclear and Decommissioning Company (JAVYS) Public Management of radioactive waste and spent fuel. Decommissioning

of the nuclear power plants.

(⁕) Public body with private legal personality.

(†) Private law body under the sole ownership of the federal government.

(‡) State-owned company CIEMAT (80%) and SEPI (20%).

(⁑) Reactors licensees.

23

3. Implementation of national programmes

3.1. Progress monitoring and key performance indicators (KPIs)

The content of the national programme is outlined in Article 12 of the Directive, which states

that:

The national programmes shall set out how the Member States intend to implement their

national policies referred to in Article 4 for the responsible and safe management of spent fuel

and radioactive waste to secure the aims of this Directive, and shall include all of the following:

(a) the overall objectives of the Member State’s national policy in respect of spent fuel and

radioactive waste management; (b) the significant milestones and clear timeframes for the

achievement of those milestones in light of the overarching objectives of the national

programme; … (g) the responsibility for the implementation of the national programme and

the key performance indicators to monitor progress towards implementation.

The vast majority of Member States have set overall objectives for their national policies for

radioactive waste and spent fuel management. However, in several cases, the policies are

incomplete, as noted elsewhere in this document.

On milestones and clear time frames, most Member States have incorporated them into their

national programmes. Nevertheless, a few Member States have not identified any milestone,

or their time frames are vague, unrealistic or only cover the short term.

KPIs, together with objectives and milestones, to which they are closely connected but from

which they must be distinguished, are essential parts of the national programme. They enable

monitoring progress on programme implementation, on national policy implementation and,

ultimately, in achieving the Directive’s overarching objective of avoiding undue burdens on

future generations. Moreover, as KPIs enable monitoring of progress on national programme

implementation, they are also an important tool for ensuring transparency to the general

public13.

The Commission commissioned a study14 on KPIs and how they are applied in monitoring the

implementation of the national programmes. The study described the characteristics of good

KPIs, including clarity, auditability, threshold values to adopt corrective measures, and the

ability to update and reassess them. In summary, effective indicators enable effective

monitoring of national programme implementation progress.

13 Article 10 of the Directive provides that ‘Member States shall ensure that necessary information on the

management of spent fuel and radioactive waste be made available to workers and the general public. This

obligation includes ensuring that the competent regulatory authority inform the public in the fields of its

competence’. 14 European Commission, Directorate-General for Energy, Study on key performance indicators for

monitoring implementation of national programmes on safe and long-term management of spent fuel and

radioactive waste: final report, Publications Office of the European Union, 2022,

https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2833/052078.

24

Setting and applying KPIs has been a persistent challenge for Member States since the first

report15 on the implementation of the Directive. Despite multiple reporting cycles, the

development and effective use of meaningful KPIs as a monitoring tool has continued to pose

a challenge, highlighting the need for further effort and improvement in this area.

The current situation shows little progress. Although a few countries have updated or recently

defined KPIs in their national programmes, more than half the Member States have not defined

KPIs or have defined set ones that lack the required characteristics mentioned above. In most

of these countries, progress is monitored through milestones, such as the construction of waste

storage or disposal facilities. A few countries use detailed multiannual plans for monitoring,

while others have defined KPIs but have not reported on them.

The lack of KPIs makes reporting on national programme implementation progress more

difficult and less clear. Progress is often communicated as a list of new activities, but it is

unclear how far the programmes are from their final objectives. Member States are encouraged

to identify suitable KPIs and use them more systematically to monitor and report on national

programme implementation progress.

3.2. Implementation status

With the exception of a few countries, national reports clearly indicate the progress made since

the last report. However, in some cases, information on progress is either missing or unclear.

In general, the implementation of national programmes has been delayed, ranging from a few

months to a number of years. These delays have accumulated over several reporting cycles and

are largely due to lengthy licencing procedures, changes in policy, or political decisions.

Although these delays have not compromised the population’s safety, they have hindered the

timely implementation of the programmes. Several countries have not reported clear timelines

or set out a long-term strategy, making it challenging to assess the progress of their

programmes.

Most countries have plans for storing all types of radioactive waste and disposing of short-lived

waste. However, decisions on the disposal of high-level waste and spent fuel are still pending

in most cases.

Compared with initial plans, the construction of disposal facilities has been delayed in most

countries. While there are no immediate concerns about the capacity for safe storage of existing

radioactive waste, some concerns remain about future waste generation.

15 Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on progress of implementation

of Council Directive 2011/70/Euratom and an inventory of radioactive waste and spent fuel present in the

Community’s territory and the future prospects, COM(2017) 236 final, COM(2017)236 - Register of

Commission Documents.

25

• Storage facilities

Most countries have put in place comprehensive strategies for the storage of all types

of radioactive waste and spent fuel. In line with those strategies, the construction,

modernisation, and extension of storage facilities are progressing, albeit with some

delays.

A limited number of Member States are near the maximum capacity of their existing

storage facilities for radioactive waste. In response, some of these Member States have

opted to implement waste reduction measures, rather than construct new storage

facilities or expand existing ones. These measures include the supercompaction of

waste and the application of clearance levels to release stored waste that meets the

relevant criteria, thereby freeing up space in existing storage facilities. While these

waste reduction strategies can help to optimise the use of existing storage capacity in

the short term, their effectiveness is limited in the longer term or in scenarios where

significant additional storage capacity is required to accommodate larger volumes of

waste. Therefore, it is essential for Member States to continue developing and

implementing comprehensive and sustainable strategies for the management of

radioactive waste, including the construction of new storage facilities or the expansion

of existing ones

During the reporting period, two Member States shipped spent fuel to facilities abroad

for reprocessing, in line with their national strategies for spent fuel management. In

total, six Member States are expected to receive returned waste, including vitrified

high-level waste and other by-products, from reprocessing operations (Table 5).

However, three Member States are currently facing significant challenges in

establishing suitable storage facilities to accommodate this returned waste, which is a

concern for the responsible management of radioactive waste. Furthermore, Member

States that have shipped spent fuel to the Russian Federation for reprocessing are

exposed to additional risks and uncertainties, including potential disruptions to

reprocessing services and returns of waste.

• Disposal facilities for spent fuel and/or high-level waste

Three Member States (Finland, Sweden and France) have made significant progress in

developing disposal facilities for high-level waste and/or spent fuel. Finland is on track

to start disposal operations in 202516, while Sweden is in the review phase of the

construction licence (2024). France is also making notable progress on the Cigéo site.

Although other countries with high-level waste or spent fuel have included deep

geological repositories (DGRs) in their national programmes, only four countries (in

16 Compared with initial plans, a delay of approximately four years was recorded due to licencing procedures.

Despite this, the Finnish DGR will be the first of a kind on a global scale.

26

addition to Finland, Sweden and France) have initiated research on siting. No concrete

action has been reported by other countries on this matter (Table 6).

Many Member States have chosen to keep the possibility of joint solutions with other

countries open, considering DGRs as a last resort. As a result, preparatory and siting

activities have stagnated and been pushed further into the future, with the exception of

Czechia, which has advanced the planned commissioning date for its DGR to 2050. The

planned commissioning dates for most repositories range from 2050 to 2075 (Figure 2).

Some Member States have already postponed milestones for site selection or the

commissioning of their DGR, and others plan to do so. One Member State has indicated

plans to construct a DGR but has not provided a time frame. The lack of concrete

progress on high-level waste and spent fuel disposal is a concern, particularly for

countries planning to build new reactors.

Figure 2: Planned start of operations of deep geological facilities

• Other disposal facilities

Progress with disposal facilities for other radioactive waste is proceeding according to

plans, although with some delays in most countries (Table 7). However, not all

countries have concepts and plans in place for the final disposal of radioactive waste –

some only have plans at the conceptual phase. Two countries have decided to export all

disused sources and radioactive waste to other countries, so there would be no need to

have a disposal facility on their territory. Other countries with only a very limited

amount of disused sealed sources and radioactive waste are considering similar

solutions. A few countries have delayed taking decisions on final disposal solutions,

including one with a nuclear power programme.

• Decommissioning

The decommissioning of shutdown nuclear installations is ongoing in several Member

States, and plans have been reported for operating installations. Decommissioning

generates large amounts of material, most of which released from regulatory control as

non-radioactive and then recycled or reused. The residual material is managed as

radioactive waste, primarily consisting of very-low-level and low-level waste, with

27

small quantities of intermediate-level waste. Progress in decommissioning is linked to

the availability of disposal sites for these types of waste.

In general, implementation of the national programmes is going according to schedule, with

some milestones met earlier than planned and others delayed, without jeopardising overall

implementation in the longer term.

Table 5: Return of by-products from spent fuel reprocessing to Member States

Type of material Timeframe

BG Return of HLW from spent fuel reprocessing in the Russian

Federation

After 2025

CZ Return of residual waste from highly enriched Uranium fuel

reprocessing in the Russian Federation First batch in 2024

Second batch in 2033

DE

The return of reprocessing waste from France was planned to be

completed in 2024. The completion of the return of reprocessing

waste from the UK is planned by 2026

2024 - 2026

ES Return of HLW from spent fuel reprocessing in France ~2029

IT Return of resulting waste from spent fuel reprocessing in France

and the UK

Not indicated

NL Return of HLW from spent fuel reprocessing in France At the latest in 2052

28

Table 6: Disposal facilities for high-level waste and spent fuel in the EU.

Status Siting/site Commissioning Operation

(years) Closure

Responsible

organisation Comment

BE Planned Not indicated ~2070 Minimum 100 ~2170 ONDRAF/NIRAS The licence for the geological disposal

facility is supposed to be granted by 2050.

BG Planned Dates not yet set SERAW

CZ

Planned 2030 2050 2176 SÚRAO Site selection by 2030; siting licence by

2032; building permit by 2036;

construction starting in 2038.

DE Planned By 2074 After 2094 BGE

DK Planned Not specified 2073 50 2122 Danish

Decommissioning

ES Planned 2029-2032 2074 2100 ENRESA

FI Construction Eurajoki (Olkiluoto) 2025 2120 POSIVA

FR Licence

application

Bure (Cigéo) 2035-2040 120 2155-2160 ANDRA

HR Planned 2050 (start of siting) 2068-2088 The Fund (•) Agreement with Slovenia: spent fuel

disposal continues as joint activity.

HU Planned Site selection ongoing 2063 2080s PURAM

LT Planned 2047 2058-2067 2068-2074 2075-2079 Ignalina NPP

NL Planned 2130 COVRA Decision to be taken around 2100.

PL Planned 2070 2070-2120 2120-2140 ZUOP

RO Planned 2025-2038 2055 ~100 ~2150 ANDR

SE Construction Forsmark 2034-2035 SKB AB

SI Planned 2045-2055 2065 10 2075 ARAO

SK Planned Site selection by 2030 2065 40-60 2105-2115 JAVYS

(•) Fund for Financing the Decommissioning of the Krško Nuclear Power Plant and the Disposal of Krško NPP Radioactive Waste and Spent Nuclear Fuel.

29

Table 7: Other disposal facilities in the EU

Status Site Commissioning

Planned

operation (years)

Responsible Comment

AT No decision on a disposal solution

BE Licence to construct

and operate

Dessel 2029 50 ONDRAF/NIRA

S

Near surface disposal facility for LLW

BG Construction Radiana/Kozloduy 2025 60 SERAW Disposal of LLW from nuclear facilities and nuclear

applications

HR Planned 2060 The Fund (•)

CY No decision on a disposal solution

CZ

Operation Dukovany 1995 95 SÚRAO Near surface disposal for radioactive waste from

NPPs

Closed Hostim / Beroun 1959 SÚRAO Closed in 1997

Operation Bratrstvi / Jáchymov 1974 SÚRAO Disposal facility for naturally occurring radioactive

materials (NORM) waste; closure is planned to start

in 2025

Operation Richard/Litoměřice 1964 SÚRAO Disposal facility for institutional radioactive waste

DK Planned 2073 Danish

Decommissioning

EE Planned Paldiski 2040 AS ALARA Planned near surface disposal of LLW together with

shaft for ILW

FI Operation Loviisa NPP 1998 FORTUM Intermediate depth disposal for LLW and ILW

Operation Olkiluoto NPP 1992 TVO Intermediate depth disposal for LLW and ILW

FR

Operation Centre de l’Aube 1992 ANDRA Near surface disposal for LLW

ClosedCentre de la Manche1969ANDRANear surface disposal for LLW

Operation Morvilliers-Cires 2003 ANDRA Landfill disposal for VLLW

DE Construction Konrad/Salzgitter Early 2030s 40 BGE Disposal facility (at least 800 m below the surface)

has been under construction since 2007

30

Status Site Commissioning

Planned

operation (years)

Responsible Comment

Remediation planned Wolfenbüttel, Lower

Saxony / Asse II salt

mine

1967 1978 BGE Retrieval of all disposed waste is planned

Closing Morsleben /

Endlager für

radioaktive Abfälle

Morsleben (ERAM)

1971 27 years BGE Disposal facility at least 480 m below the surface

EL

Planned ODRA, but

creation of a

waste

management

organisation is

planned

HU

Operation Püspökszilágy 1976 PURAM Near surface disposal for institutional radioactive

waste

OperationBátaapáti 2008 PURAM Intermediate depth disposal for LLW and ILW from

NPPs

IE Not planned

IT Planned SOGIN

LV

Operation Baldone 1962 Latvian

Environment,

Geology and

Meteorology

Centre

Near surface disposal for LLW and ILW

LT

Operation Ignalina 2024 Ignalina NPP Landfill disposal for VLLW

Construction Ignalina Ignalina NPP Near surface disposal for LLW

Planned Ignalina Ignalina NPP Planned conversion of the bituminous radioactive

waste storage facility into a near surface disposal

facility

LU Not planned

31

Status Site Commissioning

Planned

operation (years)

Responsible Comment

MT No decision on a disposal solution

NL

Operation Lelystad,

Middenmeer

Afvalzorg B.V. Landfill disposal for NORM waste

Operation Rotterdam Mineralz B.V Landfill disposal for NORM waste

PL

Operation Różan 1961 1961-2040 Radioactive

Waste

Management

Plant (ZUOP)

Near surface disposal for LLW

Planned 2033

2033-2152 Radioactive

Waste

Management

Plant

Near surface disposal for LLW

RO

Operation Baita Bihor 1985 55 IFIN-HH Near surface disposal for institutional radioactive

waste

Planned Saligny 2028 ANDR Near surface disposal for LLW from NPPs

SK Operation Mochovce 2001 JAVYS Near surface disposal for LLW

Operation Mochovce 2016 JAVYS Near surface disposal for VLLW

SI Construction Vrbina 2028 ARAO Near surface disposal for LLW together with shaft

for ILW

ES Operation El Cabril 1992 ENRESA Near surface disposal for LLW

Operation El Cabril 2008 ENRESA Landfill disposal for VLLW

SE

Operating Forsmark/SFR 1988

SKB AB Intermediate depth disposal for LLW

Planned SKB AB Intermediate depth disposal for ILW. Planned

application for licence in 2030

Operation Forsmark Forsmarks

Kraftgrupp AB

Landfill disposal for VLLW

Operation Oskarshamn /

Oskarshamn NPP

OKG AB Landfill disposal for VLLW

32

Status Site Commissioning

Planned

operation (years)

Responsible Comment

Operation Ringhals/Ringhals

NPP

Ringhals AB Landfill disposal for VLLW

Closed Studsvik/Studsvik

Tech Park

AB SVAFO Landfill disposal for VLLW

(•) The Fund for the Financing of the Decommissioning and Disposal of Radioactive Waste and Spent Nuclear Fuel from Krško Nuclear Power Plant

33

3.3. Self-assessments and international peer reviews

In line with Article 14(3) of the Directive, Member States are required to arrange for self-

assessments of their national framework, competent regulatory authority, national programme

and its implementation. They are also required to organise an international peer review of their

national framework, competent regulatory authority and/or national programme regularly and

at least every 10 years.

The aim of these self-assessments and international peer reviews is to ensure high safety

standards in managing radioactive waste and spent fuel. The Member States set out the scope,

timing and type of international peer reviews in line with Article 14(3) of the Directive. The

Directive had to be transposed by 2013, and subsequently, Member States had to conduct self-

assessments and invite international peer reviews for the first time by 2023. A Member State

must report the outcome of these international peer reviews to the Commission and to the other

Member States. The results may also be made publicly available, unless this would compromise

security and/or proprietary information. Most Member States only addressed regular self-

assessments and international peer reviews in a general way in their national programmes and

reports.

• Services for international peer reviews

While Member States are free to choose and devise the international peer reviews, the

International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) offers services in this area, which have

been the main method for carrying out international peer reviews for more than a

decade. The main advantages of carrying out reviews within the same system are the

guarantee of a higher level of consistency and the maintenance of pools of trained

experts. For these reasons, the Commission has been consistently supporting the IAEA

in setting up, developing, and maintaining these services.

• Integrated Regulatory Review Service (IRRS)17

The IRRS steers and drives Member States in strengthening and the effectiveness of

their regulatory infrastructure for nuclear, radiation, radioactive waste, and transport

safety. The IRRS is a tool to review competent regulatory authorities in a broader

context than that required by the Directive. Although the IRRS was set up before the

adoption of the Directive, it provides relevant results in line with the Directive.

In all Member States, a self-assessment of the competent authorities was carried out

through the IRRS. While the majority of Member States reported on IRRS missions,

only a few Member States provided details on the self-assessment outcomes of

radioactive waste and spent fuel management. IRRS mission reports are generally

publicly available; however, only a few Member States reported details of follow-up

action taken in response to the outcomes of these reviews in order to achieve a higher

17 https://www.iaea.org/services/review-missions/integrated-regulatory-review-service-irrs.

34

level of safety. Accordingly, compared with the previous reporting cycle, no

improvement has been noted; Member States should therefore give greater attention to

the outcomes of the peer reviews in future reports to the Commission.

• Integrated Review Service for Radioactive Waste and Spent Fuel Management,

Decommissioning and Remediation (ARTEMIS)18

When the Directive entered into force, dedicated international peer review services

were not available; therefore, since 2014 the Commission has been supporting the

IAEA in developing a self-assessment tool based on IAEA safety standards and best

practices to enable Member States to meet their self-assessment obligation

(Article 14(3) of the Directive). ARTEMIS is an integrated expert peer review service

for radioactive waste and spent fuel management, decommissioning and remediation

programmes.

As a result of intense work, all the peer review missions were carried out in a timely

manner19, and by the end of 2023, all Member States had completed the first round of

self-assessments and international peer reviews. Due to the disruptions caused by the

COVID-19 pandemic and to comply with the Directive’s requirement to have peer

review missions carried out in all EU Member States by 2023, the 18 Member States

had an ARTEMIS peer review during the reporting period. Additionally, Germany

conducted the ARTEMIS follow-up mission in 2022.

The Commission is closely following how the IAEA is developing and carrying out

ARTEMIS peer review services, not only through regular meetings with the IAEA, but

also by attending full-scope review missions as an observer.

• Synergies between international peer review services

Member States ensure compliance with Article 14(3) through IRRS and ARTEMIS

peer review missions (Table 8). Although the IAEA has worked to avoid overlaps

between ARTEMIS and IRRS review services, there are still challenges that require

further consideration.

Synergies between the ARTEMIS and IRRS missions have been explored in several

ways. The peer review mission to Spain in 2018 was the first, and so far, the only

occasion when a host country requested a joint IRRS and ARTEMIS peer review

mission. Despite some limited advantages, a number of challenges emerged in the

attempt to integrate IRRS and ARTEMIS peer reviews.

On the basis of this experience, Member States have preferred to proceed with separate

missions, with one taking place shortly after the other (preferably with the IRRS

18 https://www.iaea.org/services/review-missions/integrated-review-service-for-radioactive-waste-and-

spent-fuel-management-decommissioning-and-remediation-artemis.

19 https://www.iaea.org/services/review-missions/calendar.

35

mission followed by the ARTEMIS mission). This approach is referred to as ‘back-to-

back missions’. To avoid overlap between the missions, the IAEA has developed

additional guidance for back-to-back missions. The first back-to-back mission took

place in Slovenia in May 2022. Since then, 7 of the 14 IRRS and ARTEMIS peer review

missions requested by Member States (including Slovenia) have followed this

approach.

• Reporting

Under Article 14(3) of the Directive, Member States are required to report the outcomes

of international peer reviews of their national framework, competent regulatory

authority, and national programme to the Commission and the other Member States.

All Member States’ ARTEMIS and IRRS reports are published on the IAEA website

shortly after the completion of a mission. However, this is not considered a sufficient

means of reporting the outcomes of international peer review missions to the

Commission. Most Member States that have reported outcomes have chosen to submit

the peer review reports as a means of informing the Commission. By 2021, five Member

States had submitted their ARTEMIS peer review reports to the Commission. In the

current reporting cycle, an additional nine Member States notified the Commission of

their ARTEMIS peer review reports.

Some Member States have included a detailed presentation in their national reports of

the outcomes of the international peer review missions. However, several have not yet

reported these outcomes to the Commission. Therefore, Member States are encouraged

to do so in a timely manner in order to comply with Article 14(3).

36

Table 8: Recent and planned international peer reviews under Article 14(3) of the Directive

National programme and/or

national framework

[ARTEMIS]

Competent regulatory authority

[IRRS]

AT 2022 2018

BE 2023 (‡) 2023 (‡)

BG 2018 2024

CY 2022 2017

CZ 2023 (‡); 2027-2028 (*)(**) 2023 (‡); 2027-2028 (*)

DE 2019; 2022 (*) 2019; 2023 (*)

DK 2022 2021

EE 2019 2016; 2019 (*)

EL 2023 2012; 2017 (*)

ES 2018 (•); 2025 (*)2018 (•); 2025 (*)

FI 2022 (‡) 2022 (‡)

FR 2018 2014; 2017 (*)

HR 2023 2015; 2019 (*)

HU 2022 2015; 2018 (*)

IE 2021 2015; 2026

IT 2023 2016; 2026

LT 2022; 2027 (*) 2016; 2020 (*); 2026

LU 2018 2018

LV 2019 2019; 2024 (*)

MT 2022 2015; 2020 (*)

NL 2023 (‡) 2023 (‡)

PL 2017 2023; 2027 (*)

PT 2023 2022

RO 2022 2023

SE 2023 (‡) 2022 (‡)

SI 2022 (‡) 2022 (‡)

SK 2023 (‡) 2022 (‡); 2026 (*)

(*) Follow-up mission.

(**) Times for planned missions are in italics.

(‡) Back-to-back IRRS-ARTEMIS missions.

(•) Combined IRRS-ARTEMIS mission.

37

4. Cost assessments, financing mechanisms and available

resources

Article 9 of the Directive requires Member States to ensure adequate financial resources for

the implementation of their national programmes. In addition, Article 12(h) and (i) require each

Member State to have an estimate of the national programme costs and financing schemes in

force to ensure the financial resources.

All Member States provided information on the cost assessments of their national programmes,

although the estimates vary widely in terms of the methodology, assumptions, completeness of

data, scope and time frames (Table 9). Half the Member States (mainly those with nuclear

power programmes) have updated their cost estimates recently; however, there are several cost

estimates that have not been updated since 2015. In addition, these updates did not always

completely reflect cost developments in recent decades. Some Member States added additional

costs to their overall cost assessment but did not update the price level on which those

calculations were based; for example, in some cases the updated cost assessment was still

calculated using price levels from early 2000. As a cost estimate serves as a basis for providing

sufficient funding for the implementation of the national programme, it is important to

regularly review it and, when necessary, update it.

In the first Commission report, the total cost of radioactive waste and spent fuel management

in EU was estimated at around EUR 250 billion (2017). In the second Commission report, the

estimate was higher, at around EUR 300 billion20 (2019). This estimate remained at the same

level in the third report (2024) and has remained unchanged in the fourth review cycle.

Most Member States provided information on the financing schemes in force to implement

national programmes (Table 10). There are considerable differences in the schemes used by

different countries: a few Member States rely on a fee levied on electricity generation, others

rely on payments based on characteristics of the waste and some rely on state budget. No

changes to these financing schemes were reported during the reporting period.

More than half the Member States provided information on the status of the funds for

radioactive waste and spent fuel management, although with varying levels of detail. A few

Member States reported changes to electricity levies to ensure sufficient payments to the fund

following a cost assessment update. In most cases, Member States only applied corrective

measures (for example, by increasing payments to the fund) when it became clear that the

performance of the funds was below expectations. However, there were cases when Member

States acted proactively by regularly reviewing market conditions and adjusting payments to

the fund on the basis of these funds’ predicted future performance.

Overall, very little information was reported on the performance of the funds. The sufficient

and timely availability of funding is crucial for the implementation of the national programmes

20 These figures do not include the UK.

38

as planned. Member States are encouraged to regularly assess the performance of their funds

so they can proactively react to any changes and take corrective measures in a timely manner

when needed. Limited information was reported on the investments and management of the

funds that are required to ensure that sufficient funds will be available when needed in the

future.

The implementation of smaller national programmes (without nuclear power) is funded mainly

from the state budget. However, the national reports suggest that the required funding for

implementation of the national programmes is not always ensured, which leads to delays.

Member States that are funding their national programmes solely from the state budget are

encouraged to ensure that sufficient resources are allocated in a timely manner to support

implementation as planned.

Table 9: Estimated total cost of radioactive waste and spent fuel management based on

Member States’ programmes

Estimated total

costs

EUR million

(⁕)

(year of

estimation)

Cost of

decommissioning EUR million

Costs of

management of

radioactive waste

and spent fuel EUR million

Assumptions

AT

556 198:

Decommissioning

in Seibersdorf

18:

Decommissioning

of TRIGA reactor:

338 Costs up to 2045.

BE

17 857 (2022) 8 769 9 088 Costs up to 2150. The seven existing commercial

nuclear reactors will be in operation

for 40 years. The geological

disposal will take place between

2100 and 2110. The management of the radioactive

waste and spent fuel of future

nuclear installations is not

included.

BG

7 372 (2022) (BGN 14 455)

1 358:

Decommissioning

of Kozloduy units

1-4

1 600:

Decommissioning

of Kozloduy units

5-6

1 737:

Spent fuel

management

2 500:

Cost of the DGR

Cost assessment until 2051. Spent fuel management costs are

assessed on the assumption that

spent fuel will be reprocessed in

Russian Federation. The DGR cost estimates are

roughly based on other countries’

examples. Annual expenses by the SERAW

amount to approx. BGN 25 million

per year (BGN 1 = EUR 0.51).

HR 870.6 (2015) 192.8

The decommissioning costs will

occur after shutdown of the Krško

NPP in 2043.

39

Estimated total

costs

EUR million

(⁕)

(year of

estimation)

Cost of

decommissioning EUR million

Costs of

management of

radioactive waste

and spent fuel EUR million

Assumptions

CY 0.5 (2016)

Cost estimation is based on the cost

of repatriating disused sealed

radioactive sources (DSRSs).

CZ

5 020 (CZK 123.5

billion)

15:

Cost of manging

RAW from the

decommissioning

of NPPs and for

storing SF during

decommissioning

5:

Cost of processing

operational RAW in

the NPPs

3.3: Cost of processing

and storing

institutional RAW

14: Cost of managing

LILW, including

closure of

repositories

37.8: Cost of storing SNF

132:

Cost of constructing

and operating the

deep repository

Overall cost of implementation of

the concept for 2015-2100 (if there

are no new NPPs) (CZK 1 =

EUR 0.041).

DK

455

Cost of implementation of

Parliamentary Resolutions

B48/2003 and B90/2018: DKK 1.120 billion and DKK 2.271

billion, respectively (DKK 1 =

EUR 0.134)

EE 124

Cost for 2018-2050.

FI

2816 (2023) Cost of

decommissioning:

approx. 1 100

~ 5 000:

cost of SF disposal

~ 150:

cost of management

of operational waste

The assessment time frame is up to

~2120. Decommissioning costs cover

dismantling and disposal of the

radioactive waste in on-site disposal

facilities. Cost of spent fuel management

covers the construction, operation

and closure of the disposal facility,

R&D expenses, disposal activities

relating to the SF.

FR 110 500 (2014) 45 000 25 000:

geological disposal. Cost estimates up to 2135.

DE

66 900 (2012)

34 000:

Cost of

decommissioning

32 900 The cost of radioactive waste and

spent fuel management are up to

2080.

40

Estimated total

costs

EUR million

(⁕)

(year of

estimation)

Cost of

decommissioning EUR million

Costs of

management of

radioactive waste

and spent fuel EUR million

Assumptions

and management

(without disposal)

EL

9.95 or 10.7

(2023) Decommissioning

the research

reactor: 1.8

2.5:

Recycling DSRS and

nuclear materials

1.65: Classification of

legacy waste

1.5:

Upgrading existing

radioactive waste

management facility

Up to 1.95:

New disposal facility

1.3:

Management of

RAW until disposal

The cost will depend on the site of

the disposal.

HU

5 300 (2015) (HUF 1 650 402

million)

1 237 (2015) 4 063 (2015) Cost estimate is up to 2064. Cost estimate covers

decommissioning of 4 NPP units in

operation; decommissioning of

spent fuel interim storage facility;

radioactive waste disposal facilities;

HLW disposal facility; PURAM

operating costs, supervision fees,

fund management and support to

local governments.

(HUF 1 = EUR 0.0024 in 2024)

IE 0.6 (2022)

For 2022-2026.

IT

17 700 (2023) 7 880 for

completing the

decommissioning

of the 4 NPPs and

the nuclear fuel

cycle facilities

2030 (excluding geological

disposal).

LV

7.1 (2021) Maintenance and

decommissioning

of research reactor:

4.188

2.91:

Management and

development of

disposal facility

LT

5 323 (2016)

Cost estimate up to 2138: 2021-2030: EUR 1.001 billion,

mainly Ignalina NPP

decommissioning; 2031-2038: EUR 0.922 billion,

mainly Ignalina NPP

decommissioning;

41

Estimated total

costs

EUR million

(⁕)

(year of

estimation)

Cost of

decommissioning EUR million

Costs of

management of

radioactive waste

and spent fuel EUR million

Assumptions

2038-2138: EUR 3.4 billion, mainly

implementation of deep geological

repository and further

decommissioning activities.

LU

EUR 15 948 a

year

Up to 2029.

Only orphan sources and materials

considered. Cost of shipment to

Belgium and interim storage.

MT 0.433-0.901

Cost for 10 years.

NL

2 300 (2023) + EUR million

17.7 a year

2 300 (2023)

for the DGR.

~17.7 a year:

Cost of the above-

ground management

of radioactive waste

at COVRA: approx.

Up to 2130.

NL

2 300 (2023) +

17.7 a year

17.7:

Annual cost to

manage radioactive

waste

Up to 2130.

Deep geological repository cost

estimate: EUR million 2 300

(2023).

PL 3 680 (2018)

Up to 2152.

PT EUR 200 000 -

250 000 a year

Annual costs.

RO

EUR 4 864 + EUR 5.865

million EUR a

year

1 860 123.7 plus additional

5.7 a year:

predisposal activities

2 880 plus additional

0.165 a year:

Disposal costs

Decommissioning estimate for four

reactors.

SK

1 237 (2019)

No further details on

other SF and RAW

management costs.

No new information. These are only the total estimated

decommissioning costs for one of

the NPPs

SI

1 381 192.8 125.52, to be evenly

divided between

Slovenia and Croatia

= 62.76 each

LILW disposal costs:

136.88 in total, to be

evenly divided

between Slovenia

and Croatia = 568.44

each.

Cost of storing HLW

and SF

29.8:

Up to 2112. The immediate decommissioning

scenario. Cost of decommissioning does not

include cost of storing HLW and

SF. Costs shown for Slovenia are

half the total cost (based on the

agreements between Croatia and

Slovenia). LILW disposal construction,

operation and closure between 2024

and 2058. Cost of implementing the

programme of research,

development and demonstration

42

Estimated total

costs

EUR million

(⁕)

(year of

estimation)

Cost of

decommissioning EUR million

Costs of

management of

radioactive waste

and spent fuel EUR million

Assumptions

Costs of HLW and

SF disposal activities in the area of RAW and

SF management.

ES

28 156 (2023) of which

EUR 20 200 is

for 2024-2100.

5 787 of which

4 765 is for 2023-

2100

18 846 of which

15 453 for 2023-

2100

Estimate for 1985-2100, including

the incurred costs. Open cycle,

present fleet, closure of all

operating nuclear power plants by

2035.

SE

10 673 (2022) 659:

Costs already

incurred

2 084: future costs

3 537:

Costs already

incurred

7 117:

future costs

Reactors operating time of 60 years.

Reference takes into account

existing and planned facilities. Remaining basic costs from and

including 2024 (SEK 1 =

EUR 0.086).

(⁕) Otherwise specified.

43

Table 10: Financing mechanisms by Member State

Financing mechanisms Comments

AT

When radioactive waste is transferred to NES, the waste generator pays a fee consisting of two parts:

- a treatment fee to cover the costs of processing and interim storage by NES;

- a disposal fee (advance fee) that is collected by NES and transferred to the federal government, earmarked

specifically for financing the subsequent disposal of the waste.

However, Austria covers the cost of constructing the required management facilities and any major changes needed to

meet current technical standards.

Additionally, the federal government accepts responsibility for costs associated with the management and disposal of

radioactive waste where no other provision or funding mechanism is in place.

NES reviews their fees annually.

BE

The cost of radioactive waste and spent fuel management are financed through two main mechanisms:

- NPP operators’ financing mechanisms to cover their spent fuel and waste management activities, the

decommissioning of their installations and the transfer of waste to ONDRAF/NIRAS;

- financing mechanisms by ONDRAF/NIRAS for management of the waste it accepts, including disposal.

Three main funds below are in place.

i.A long-term fund is financed by producers every time they transfer radioactive waste to ONDRAF/NIRAS, under

a mechanism designed to ensure that ONDRAF/NIRAS can cover the fixed costs of storage and disposal, while

also meeting variable costs as they arise. ii.A medium-term fund is financed by contributions from the producers, calculated on the basis of the total

volumetric capacity of the disposal facility (surface or geological) and the total quantity of waste from each producer

intended for disposal in that facility. The obligation for producers to contribute to the fund begins as soon as the

disposal facility has received its nuclear construction and operating licence and the required non-nuclear permits.

The amount set by law must be fully established no later than three months after the disposal facility has been

authorised to start operations.

iii.An insolvency fund to finance waste management services following the bankruptcy or insolvency of the

financially liable bodies, as well as the management of orphan sources and radioactive waste. The fund is financed

by invoicing producers a reserve of 5% calculated on the costs of the transport, treatment, conditioning, storage,

and, since 2020, disposal services provided by ONDRAF/NIRAS.

The federal state is responsible for financing the management of historical waste from the specified sites.

- Every five years, ONDRAF/NIRAS

assesses whether the established and

planned provisions are in place and

sufficient to cover the management costs.

- Every three years, the Commission for

Nuclear Provisions assesses whether the

provisions for NPP operators are in place,

are sufficient and are available.

- Since 2019, fee increases related to the

long-term fund have been passed on to

producers on the basis of their full

radioactive waste production programme,

covering both waste already transferred to

ONDRAF/NIRAS and waste still to be

transferred.

BG

Kozloduy NPP covers the costs of managing radioactive waste and spent fuel before transfer to SERAW by incorporating

these costs into electricity prices.

Long-term liabilities for decommissioning nuclear power plants and managing radioactive waste by SERAW are covered

by two funds.

The financing system does not cover costs

related to deep geological disposal.

44

Financing mechanisms Comments

- The Radioactive Waste Fund covers costs of SERAW’s radioactive waste management activities, including waste

from Kozloduy NPP, nuclear applications, disused sealed radioactive sources, and legacy waste. The fund is financed

from contributions by the radioactive waste generators.

- The Nuclear Facilities Decommissioning Fund covers the decommissioning costs for Kozloduy NPP. The fund is

financed from contributions by the Kozloduy NPP. The decommissioning of units 1-4 is also supported by the

Kozloduy International Decommissioning Support Fund (KIDSF), set up to manage grants provided by the European

Commission.

Both funds are managed in separate accounts at the National Bank of Bulgaria, with financial management and supervision

carried out by the Ministry of Energy.

HR

The Fund for the Financing of the Decommissioning and Disposal of Radioactive Waste and Spent Nuclear Fuel from

Krško Nuclear Power Plant (the Fund) is the primary mechanism for financing radioactive waste and spent fuel

management. The Fund’s resources come from three main sources:

- quarterly payments from Hrvatska elektroprivreda d.d.;

- management fees paid to the Fund by generators and owners of radioactive waste and DSRS;

- payments from the Croatian state budget.

The state budget also covers the costs of the management of institutional waste already in storage, as well as the costs of

decommissioning and/or remediation of those research and storage facilities. The generators and owners of radioactive

waste and DSRS are responsible for providing resources for the management of other institutional waste and DSRS.

CY

Radioactive waste generators must bear all costs associated with managing their waste, from production to disposal,

including the cost of monitoring waste and waste storage (or in future, repositories after their closure) and the cost of the

required research and development.

The export/shipment (or in future, processing, conditioning or treatment) of radioactive waste for disposal is paid for by

the generator in the form of direct payments to the supplier/manufacturer of the sources or specialist organisations that

carry out these activities, wherever applicable.

The government is responsible for financing the management of radioactive waste where the generator no longer exists.

CZ

Funding of predisposal activities is ensured by the own resources of radioactive waste and spent fuel generators. The

costs of decommissioning, radioactive waste disposal, and spent fuel treatment and disposal are financed through the two

main mechanisms described below.

- The Nuclear Account Fund provides funding for the disposal of radioactive waste and spent fuel. The funds come

from various sources, such as fees from radioactive waste generators, revenue from financial market operations, and

interest from the nuclear account. The account is held at the Czech National Bank and administered by the Ministry

of Finance.

45

Financing mechanisms Comments

- Decommissioning reserves. Nuclear operators and facilities with significant sources of ionising radiation set up and

manage internal segregated funds, specifically intended to cover the future costs of decommissioning, thereby

ensuring that sufficient financial resources are set aside to meet these obligations.

Licensed operators authorised for the management of radioactive waste collect a fee from institutional waste generators

when the waste is delivered.

DK

The main mechanisms to finance radioactive waste and spent fuel management are the following.

- The state budget. The financial resources for implementation of the national programme come from reserve fund

allocations. These allocations are recorded as budget positions in the Financial Act, which is adopted annually by the

Danish parliament.

- Institutional waste generators are subject to management fees on delivery of waste to Danish Decommissioning.

Fees are kept at a modest level in order to preserve the incentive for delivering waste.

EE

Main mechanisms to finance radioactive waste and spent fuel management:

- the state budget, as the vast majority of the waste to be managed is legacy waste;

- institutional waste generators are subject to radioactive waste management fees on delivery of waste to

AS ALARA.

FI

Operators of nuclear facilities are responsible for financing the costs of the management of radioactive waste and spent

fuel and the decommissioning of reactors. Additional backup funds are collected in the Nuclear Waste Management Fund.

The obligation to make financial provision starts when the licence is granted for operations that produce nuclear or

radioactive waste. For new NPPs, the obligation to set assets in the Fund starts when the NPP has an operating licence

and fuel is loaded in the reactor.

Institutional waste generators are subject to radioactive waste management fees when waste is delivered for storage or

disposal.

FR

Waste generators must estimate and make financial provision for their future liabilities. Operators of basic nuclear

installations are required to maintain segregated assets, which are protected from company creditors and can only be

used to cover specific liabilities. By contrast, operators of installations classified on environmental protection

grounds that deal with radioactive waste are not required to have segregated assets, but must instead provide financial

guarantees that meet specific value and quality requirements.

DE

The main mechanisms to finance radioactive waste and spent fuel management are the following.

- The German Nuclear Waste Management Fund (KENFO) provides funding for the disposal costs of radioactive

waste from commercial nuclear power plants. The fund reimburses the federal government for the costs incurred

from the moment the disposal obligation was transferred under the Act on the Transfer of Nuclear Waste Liabilities.

The fund was created by transferring funds collected by NPP operators to the federal state.

- Provision made by nuclear power plant operators ensure funding for the decommissioning, dismantling, and

conditioning of radioactive waste in line with acceptance criteria set by BGE.

- Provisions made by nuclear fuel cycle facilities and other nuclear installations, for which waste management

costs are not covered by the KENFO.

- For post-closure financing of a disposal facility, the required funds are provided by the federal government.

46

Financing mechanisms Comments

- The financing of the decommissioning of public-sector nuclear installations and facilities, including the management

of associated radioactive waste, is ensured by the Federation and the Länder from the public budgets. The state also

bears the costs for the closure of the Morsleben repository for radioactive waste and the Asse II mine.

- Institutional waste generators pay a fee for the use of federal state collecting facilities, which ensure the long-term

management of radioactive waste. The fees are intended to cover all expenses associated with the subsequent

management of waste. A portion of these fees levied by the Land collecting facilities is related to the disposal of

radioactive waste and is forwarded directly to the Federation.

The decommissioning and associated waste management costs for the Joint Research Centre of the European Commission

in Karlsruhe are financed by the EU’s budget through a dedicated programme.

EL

Multiple sources are used to finance radioactive waste management, such as:

- the state budget;

- the deposit fund;

- the public investment programme and the Recovery and Resilience Facility.

HU

The primary mechanisms for financing decommissioning, radioactive waste management, spent fuel management, and

disposal costs is the Central Nuclear Financing Fund. Resources to this fund come from two main sources:

- annual payments from the Paks NPP for the management of radioactive waste and spent fuel generated during

operations and decommissioning;

- contributions from the state budget to cover the management of spent fuel and institutional radioactive waste from

the licence holders that are financed by the state.

Additionally, costs associated with the management of institutional waste from small waste generators are borne by the

generators themselves when the waste is transferred to the disposal facility.

IE

The costs for the disposal of radioactive waste are borne by the company responsible for generating the radioactive waste.

When the owner is unable to pay, the recovery of orphan sources or the storage of legacy sources is covered by the

Radioactive Waste Management Fund, which is financed from the state budget.

IT

Decommissioning and radioactive waste management for all publicly owned or financed nuclear installations are financed

from the state budget. By contrast, funding for the management of radioactive waste of industrial, medical, and research

origin is ensured by the waste generators themselves.

The decommissioning and waste management costs for the Joint Research Centre of the European Commission in Ispra

are financed from the EU’s budget through a dedicated programme.

LV

Radioactive waste generators are responsible for providing the financial resources for the management of their radioactive

waste. This includes covering the costs of transporting the waste to WMO, as well as the costs associated with preparing

the radioactive waste for disposal.

The state budget finances historical nuclear liabilities, including the operation of the disposal facility, and the

decommissioning of the Salaspils research reactor.

LT

The radioactive waste and spent fuel management activities are financed through the following channels.

- Decommissioning of Ignalina NPP and the management of associated radioactive waste and spent fuel are financed

from the EU budget and the state budget. These sources fund the development of all new radioactive waste

- Lithuania allocates at least EUR 3 million

annually to the Reserve (Stabilisation)

47

Financing mechanisms Comments

management facilities being built or planned as part of the Ignalina NPP decommissioning process. This process

includes the solid radioactive waste management and storage facility, the interim spent nuclear fuel storage facility,

and the landfill and near surface disposal facilities. Although the Ignalina programme’s funding is based on annual

commitments, which can be accumulated over several years to fund major radioactive waste management

infrastructure projects.

- The implementation of the deep geological repository is financed from a separate account within the Reserve

(Stabilisation) Fund. Contributions from the state budget are the main source of income.

- Institutional waste generators are responsible for paying for waste collection, transportation, treatment, storage, and

disposal services through contracts with the Ignalina NPP. The Ignalina NPP collects fees from institutional waste

producers in a separate dedicated account. The management of historical institutional waste is funded from either the

state budget or the municipal budget.

Fund, which is dedicated to collecting

funds for the DGR.

- An interinstitutional working group has

been set up to prepare proposals for

additional sources of income for the

Reserve (Stabilisation) fund and to

develop an optimised funding model for

the DGR implementation project and its

supervision.

LU

The cost of managing the radioactive waste sent to Belgium is paid by the Grand-Duchy of Luxembourg.

In addition, the Luxembourgish government covers all related transportation expenses, as well as the costs of radioactive

waste management from private individuals, public bodies, and radioactive material for which no legal holder has been

identified.

In all other cases, waste generators must bear all expenses.

MT

The licence holders are responsible for ensuring sufficient financial resources to cover radioactive waste management

costs.

The cost of the management of the country’s centralised storage facility is paid from central government funds.

NL

Radioactive waste generators are responsible for covering the cost of waste management. COVRA incorporates the

estimated cost of storage and geological disposal into the tariffs it charges to waste suppliers. A portion of the tariffs is

allocated to a fund, which is expected to grow over the storage period, ultimately covering the costs of both above-ground

storage and geological disposal.

Producers of NORM waste who wish to dispose of their waste at a designated landfill must pay a fee to the province

where the landfill is located. This fee is intended to cover the costs of operating the landfill, as well as the costs of

monitoring the site after closure. The province is responsible for the aftercare and the monitoring of landfills.

The decommissioning and associated waste management costs for the Joint Research Centre of the European Commission

in Petten are financed from the EU’s budget through a dedicated programme.

Once the tariffs are paid, the financial liability

for the waste is transferred to COVRA.

PL

Radioactive waste generators are responsible for ensuring the financing of their waste management, from generation to

disposal. The national WMO is authorised to charge fees for its services, which are reviewed annually.

Where waste has no identified owner or if the funds raised prove insufficient, the state budget will provide financing to

cover the shortfall.

PT

Radioactive waste generators are responsible for covering the costs associated with their waste management. They are

paying the fee for the delivery of the waste to the current storage facility. The difference between collected fees and actual

costs is covered by the general state budget and other Instituto Superiore Tecnico revenue.

Cost of decommissioning the research reactor will be covered by the state budget.

RO Radioactive waste and spent fuel management activities are financed through the following channels.

48

Financing mechanisms Comments

- The cost of spent fuel and radioactive waste management activities at Cernavoda NPP, including the commissioning

of the spent fuel dry storage, are covered by the operational costs.

- The decommissioning of Cernavoda NPP and the disposal of associated waste are financed from segregated accounts

at the national treasury, to which Cernavoda NPP makes an annual contribution.

- The financing of the Baita Bihor disposal facility, the decommissioning of the research reactor, and the management

of non-fuel cycle radioactive waste are primarily funded from the state budget.

SK

The primary mechanism for financing decommissioning, radioactive waste management, spent fuel management, and

disposal costs is the National Nuclear Fund. The fund ensures financing for the following activities:

- decommissioning of nuclear installations operated at the Jaslovské Bohunice site (A-1, V-1, and V-2 NPP);

- decommissioning and associated waste management of nuclear installations at the Mochovce site (Mochovce NPP

1-4);

- decommissioning of new nuclear installations commissioned after 1 January 2019, including the management of

radioactive waste from their decommissioning;

- management of nuclear materials of unknown origin and radioactive materials of unknown origin;

- implementation of disposal facilities;

- management of institutional radioactive waste.

The National Nuclear Fund’s resources are generated from mandatory contributions or payments, which are held in sub-

accounts or analytical accounts. These accounts also include income from depositing these funds and yields from financial

operations.

SI

Radioactive waste and spent fuel management activities are financed through the following channels.

- The costs of radioactive waste and spent fuel management, treatment, and storage are included in the operating costs

of the Krško NPP (NEK).

- The costs of disposing Slovenia’s share of radioactive waste and spent fuel are covered by a share of the revenue

from the sale of electricity generated by NEK. This share is paid by the direct owner of the Slovenian half of NEK,

i.e. GEN energija d.o.o., into the Fund for the Decommissioning of NEK.

- The planning of the construction and operation of the repository and disposal of half of the LILW from NEK is

financed mainly from the Fund for the Decommissioning of NEK and from the state budget. The key element that

decides how the division is to be made between the two funding sources is the proportion of waste from NEK (in

volume) and the proportion of waste from other sources (also in volume).

- The operation and decommissioning of the TRIGA Mark II research reactor, as well as the management of its

radioactive waste and spent fuel management, are financed from the state budget.

- Financing the management of institutional radioactive waste comes from the central government budget and the

payment made by users of the public service, i.e. when users deliver the waste to ARAO, the waste management

organisation.

49

Financing mechanisms Comments

- The financial resources for the operation of RŽV, d.o.o. (a public company) are provided solely through the central

government budget. The management, long-term surveillance and maintenance of both repositories will be financed

through the central government budget as part of the public utility service of radioactive waste management.

ES

The primary financing mechanism for implementing the General Radioactive Waste Plan is the Fund, which covers the

costs of managing radioactive waste and spent fuel from all facilities, as well as activities associated with the

decommissioning and dismantling of nuclear facilities. The decommissioning of other facilities is financed directly by

licensees.

The Fund is primarily financed by contributions from licence holders of nuclear and radioactive facilities, which are

legally classified as non-tax contributions to a specific-purpose public fund. The main categories of contributions are

described below.

- A non-tax public charge relating to: (i) tariffs for managing radioactive waste and spent fuel from NPPs that were

taken out of operation before 1 January 2010, and for decommissioning these facilities; (ii) future costs pertaining to

NPPs or fuel assembly manufacturing facilities that, after their operation has definitively ceased, had not been

anticipated during the operational stage; and (iii) any costs that might arise from the early shutdown of the facility

for reasons beyond the control of the licensee.

- A non-tax public charge relating to nuclear facilities still in operation. All costs incurred from 1 January 2010 in

connection with the management of radioactive waste and spent fuel generated at operating NPPs will be financed

by the NPP operators, regardless of the date on which the waste and fuel is produced, together with the costs of their

eventual decommissioning and dismantling. The amount payable by each NPP during the operation of the facility is

a charge on the electricity generated.

- A non-tax public charge relating to the manufacture of fuel elements at the Juzbado facility, intended to cover the

cost of the services provided in managing radioactive waste from fuel assembly manufacturing, including the

dismantling of fuel assembly manufacturing facilities. The amount is calculated as a rate applied to the amount of

nuclear fuel manufactured each year.

- A non-tax public charge relating to other facilities is intended to cover the management services for radioactive waste

generated at facilities other than those listed above, such as radioactive facilities (medicine, industry, agriculture and

research), Ciemat, and other companies. In each case, the costs are applied to the parties concerned at the time the

services are provided. The fee payable by the facilities is the result of multiplying the quantity or unit of waste

delivered for management by the tax rates.

The management of the Fund is entrusted to ENRESA and is governed by the principles of security, profitability and

liquidity.

SE

Radioactive waste and spent fuel management activities are financed through the following channels.

- The Nuclear Waste Fund ensures the financing of decommissioning activities for nuclear power programme

installations, as well as the management of associated radioactive waste and spent fuel, including disposal. Licence

holders pay a fee to the fund and are also required to provide guarantees in the event of premature facility closure or

to cover contingencies. If the fund’s resources are insufficient to cover costs, licence holders remain liable.

50

Financing mechanisms Comments

- Nuclear licensees, other than power reactor operators, are also required to pay fees to the Nuclear Waste Fund and

provide a financial guarantee to cover unpaid fees (the credit risk amount).

- Institutional radioactive waste generators are responsible for securing financial resources for the management of their

waste. In addition, there is a state financing scheme for the clean-up of orphan sources and other legacy waste that is

administered by Swedish Radiation Safety Authority.

51

5. Expertise, skills and R&D

5.1. Expertise and skills

All parties in Member States have ‘to make arrangements for education and training for their

staff, as well as research and development activities to cover the needs of the national

programme for radioactive waste and spent fuel management in order to obtain, maintain and

to further develop necessary expertise and skills’ (Article 8 of the Directive).

Implementation of Article 8 has shown further improvements in some Member States: nearly

all of them have set out national legal requirements for training and education of staff involved

in radioactive waste and spent fuel management. National schemes and arrangements for

education and training have remained largely unchanged and are summarised below:

• post-graduate courses at universities;

• training centres (basic and specialised, some at nuclear power plants);

• training programmes or plans (i.e. at national, facility or organisation level);

• regular self-assessments of staff and needs analysis;

• specialised, regular training for different levels of staff (e.g. on-the-job training with

experienced staff);

• specialised courses (e.g. for newcomers or experienced staff).

Some Member States reported improvements, such as the development of new training

programmes or the creation of training centres. However, other Member States still lack

detailed information on the implementation of their legal requirements. In addition, around one

fifth of Member States did not report any training and education activities for regulators or

licensees.

5.2. Research and development

Each Member State’s national programme must include ‘the research, development and

demonstration activities that are needed to implement solutions for the management of spent

fuel and radioactive waste’ (Article 12(1)(f) of the Directive).

In the fourth national reports, Member States provided very little information on their planned

research, development and demonstration activities. Research and development activities to

build national radioactive waste and spent fuel management expertise were reported by around

half the Member States. Only six Member States (mainly with large and medium nuclear

programmes) reported on the progress of their research and development

activities/programmes since the last reporting period. The other Member States did not report

any information or reported only in general terms.

52

Unsurprisingly, mainly those countries without a nuclear power programme have difficulties

in fulfilling the Directive’s research and development requirements. By contrast, Member

States with a nuclear power programme have, in general, more developed formal arrangements

for training and education, and advanced research and development activities. Member States,

particularly those without a nuclear power programme, have recognised that international

exchanges of experience through peer reviews, workshops, conferences and technical visits are

useful tools.

Most Member States with smaller nuclear programmes presented the research and development

activities and time frames for the final disposal of intermediate-level waste, high-level waste

and spent fuel in very general terms. Nearly half the Member States did not report any details

or confirmed that they had no specific research programme in place. Member States with only

disused radioactive sources in their inventories do not plan to develop specific research,

development and demonstration programmes. However, they rely on participating in or

following the results of international programmes or projects (e.g. through the IAEA and

European Commission) that are in line with their radioactive waste management needs.

Nevertheless, a few of these Member States, recognising the importance of research, plan to

conduct their own research, development and demonstration activities and to describe them in

future reviews of their national programmes.

Only a few Member States have put in place comprehensive research, development and

demonstration programmes that support implementation of their national programmes. Several

of these Member States regularly review and update their research programmes and are among

those that have made significant progress in developing deep geological disposal facilities.

These Member States typically carry out a national research programmes and actively

participate in international research initiatives, such as Euratom research programmes. In

addition, they participate, drive, and promote international cooperation and exchange forums

that have been established at European and international level. Member States with smaller

programmes also report participating in international research initiatives. Reporting is usually

limited to the list of international projects in which they take part. Member States are

encouraged to not only list international R&D projects in their national reports but also provide

information on the expected impact of those projects on the implementation of their national

programmes.

53

6. Transparency and public participation

National frameworks must include the national policy and process for transparency (Article 10

of the Directive). Member States have to ensure that the necessary information on the

management of radioactive waste spent fuel is made available to workers and the general public

(including information from the competent regulatory authority). They also must ensure that

the public is given the opportunity to participate effectively in the decision-making process for

radioactive waste and spent fuel management, in line with national legislation and international

obligations.

All Member States’ national programmes and reports contained information on the policy and

regulatory arrangements governing transparency and referred to the obligation to inform the

public as well as the consultation and participation mechanisms. Most Member States reported

no significant changes in these policy and regulatory arrangements. A few Member States

reported additional developments, improving their compliance with Article 10.

Information on activities related to radioactive waste and spent fuel management is publicly

available in all Member States. Mostly institutional websites are the primary source of

information; typically, information is found on the websites of the regulatory authorities and

waste management organisations. Key documents (including national programmes, national

reports, international evaluations, and annual reports) on strategies and their implementation

are usually public. Countries with nuclear power plants generally use a range of information

channels and techniques, that a broad audience can understand. Long-term decisions, such as

the siting and construction of geological repositories, are often accompanied by national

information campaigns.

Some Member States regularly provide information using other media or through information

or visitor centres. In a few cases, regular meetings with the general public were reported.

Several Member States reported that documents on licencing procedures for nuclear and

radioactive waste facilities are public and easily accessible on the authorities’ websites. In some

cases, every official record of the regulators activities is systematically published.

Several Member States provided descriptions or recent examples of how their transparency

policy is implemented in practice, especially effective participation practices. Member States

are encouraged to give more examples and descriptions of practical implementation of their

transparency policy.

Almost all Member States reported on consultation mechanisms set out in their national

frameworks. Public consultation is required for political decisions with environmental

implications, including those related to radioactive waste management. Consultations most

often take place as part of strategic environmental assessments, environmental impact

assessments or during the licencing of activities. In several countries, the adoption of new

legislation with an environmental impact is also subject to public consultation. Member States

are also encouraged to give more examples and descriptions of practical implementation of the

consultation mechanisms in place.

54

In several cases, national reports and national programmes either did not provide any

description of participation or only gave general explanations. The actual impact of public

participation on the decision-making process was usually not explained.

Overall, most Member States are well aware of the importance of public information and

participation relating to radioactive waste and spent fuel management and have ensured

compliance with Article 10 in their national frameworks.