Nuclear Energy in the European Union – the need
for a level playing field
Tobias Heldt
Maastricht University
Outline
1. Introduction
2. The Status Quo
3. Core principles of the International
Conventions
4. Nuclear Energy and European Law
5. Rethinking the existing principles
6. Conclusions
Introduction
• Currently 131 nuclear power plants in
operation
• No common policy on nuclear energy within
the European Union
• Some Member States decided for phase out,
others still rely heavily on nuclear
• Impetus after Fukushima?
The Status Quo
Two main international systems for nuclear liability:
• OECD: 1960 Paris and 1963 Brussels Conventions
– Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, the Netherlands, Germany,
Sweden, Italy, the UK, Spain and Slovenia are parties to the
Paris/Brussels regime
– Portugal and Greece are only parties to the Paris Convention
• IAEA: 1963 Vienna Convention as amended by the 1997 Protocol
– Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Lithuania, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia,
Latvia and Romania are parties to the 1963 Vienna regime
– Latvia and Romania have also signed the Protocol from 1997 to amend
the Vienna Convention, Czech Republic, Lithuania, Hungary and Poland
have signed it
Core principles of the International
Conventions
• Strict liability of the nuclear operator
• Legal channelling
– Rationale of this principle?
– Conformity with EU law?
• Limitation of liability
– Are limits set at appropriate levels?
• Compulsory insurance
– Issues of congruence
Nuclear Energy and European Law
• Patchwork within the European Union concerning
nuclear liability
– Legal uncertainty?
– Transboundary externalities?
– Effect on the Internal Market?
• Polluter Pays Principle
– Article 191(2) states “that environmental damage
should as a priority be rectified at source and that the
polluter should pay”
– Are current regimes in line with this principle?
Nuclear Energy and European Law
• Euratom Treaty remained basically unchanged since
1957
– Article 1: “It shall be the task of the Community to
contribute to the raising of the standard of living in the
Member States and to the development of relations with
the other countries by creating the conditions necessary
for the speedy establishment and growth of nuclear
industries”
• Rethinking the legislative competences
– Article 114 TFEU
– Article 192 TFEU
– Dual legal basis?
Rethinking the existing principles
• Limitation of liability as a subsidy to nuclear industry
– State aid concerns
• Legal channelling vs. economic channelling
– Is legal channelling (still) justified?
– Price Anderson Act in the USA
– New Nuclear Liability Law in India allows for recourse
against designers and suppliers
• Increasing liability amounts
– How to increase coverage?
• Role of the state?
• European pooling system?
Conclusions
• If nuclear energy shall remain part of the
Energy Mix, existing principles have to be
rethought and updated
• European Union could become the forerunner
in the area of nuclear liability
• Since we are facing a European problem, we
need a European solution