You are on page 1of 2

17. 3.

98 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 82/87

(98/C 82/147) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2466/97

by Patricia McKenna (V) to the Commission
(16 July 1997)

Subject: Flights of mixed oxide (MOX) fuel from the Sellafield nuclear complex, Britain

The 12 June issue of Sellafield Newsletter, produced by British Nuclear Fuels Ltd (BNFL), states that Carlisle
airport in Cumbria has recently been used to transport mixed oxide (MOX) nuclear fuel from the Sellafield
complex ‘to a customer in Europe’. According to BNFL, ‘the transports involved a total of five flights and were
all conducted in complete safety’.

Was the Commission given prior notice of these flights? Will it give details of any data which BNFL provided on
the safety measures covering these flights?

What is the Commission’s policy on the transport of MOX fuel in general?

Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission

(15 September 1997)

The transport of radioactive material is organised in accordance with the regulations of the International atomic
energy agency (IAEA) and implemented, for air transport, by the technical instructions of the International civil
aviation organisation (ICAO), in force in all Community Member States.

No specific notification had to be made to the Commission concerning air transport of mixed oxide (MOX) fuel.

The policy of the Commission is to ensure that the rules applicable to international air transport of radioactive
material are respected.

(98/C 82/148) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2470/97

by Freddy Blak (PSE) to the Commission
(16 July 1997)

Subject: Free movement of labour

Has the EU, in connection with the introduction of the free movement of labour, considered helping the Member
States by drawing up a set of rules guaranteeing effective and mutual exchanges of information on periods of
employment and incomes with a view to preventing fraud with social benefits including unemployment benefits?
How will the Commission guarantee taxation either in the country in which the work is performed or in the
country in which the wage earner has his permanent residence?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(15 September 1997)

Article 51 of the EC Treaty requires the Council to adopt such measures in the field of social security as are
necessary to provide freedom of movement for workers.

Within this framework (1), the Commission and the Administrative Commission on Social Security for Migrant
Workers have developed the Telematics in Social Security (TESS) programme, the main objective of which is to
speed up the granting and calculation of social benefits for migrant workers.

The information necessary to establish entitlement to social benefits and to calculate the amounts due are
exchanged between the competent institutions of the Member States using standardised forms. The TESS
programme projects will allow exchanges of information on paper to be replaced by telematic exchanges, thanks
in particular to the development of common standards for the identification of insured persons, identification
C 82/88 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 17. 3. 98

of the competent institution, and periods of insurance completed in another Member State. The first telematic
exchanges have taken place among eight Member States under a pilot project for the exchange of data in the
pensions sector. The TESS programme will not be extended to the unemployment sector until the results of the
current projects have been assessed. The rapid and efficient application of national and Community legislation in
the field of social security for migrant workers is one of the objectives of the TESS programme. The outcome
will be that telematic exchanges of data between competent institutions will allow more effective monitoring of
the granting of social benefits.

(1) Council Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of 14June 1971 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons, to self-employed
persons and to members of their families moving within the Community (OJ L 149, 5.7.1971), Articles 81 and 85 of Council Regulation
(EEC) No 574/72 of 21 March 1972 laying down the procedure for implementing Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 (OJ L 4, 27.3.1972), more
specifically Articles 2, 50 cf. 117, as most recently amended by Regulation (EC) No 1290/97 of 27June 1997 (OJ L 176, 4.7.1997).

(98/C 82/149) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2476/97

by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission
(16 July 1997)

Subject: Non-Proliferation Treaty

Following a resolution of the 1995 Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference, the Board of Governors of the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) approved on 15 May 1997 − with the full support of the European
Union − a model protocol whose purpose is to reform and strengthen the IAEA safeguards in all non-nuclear
weapon states (NNWS) worldwide.

1. Has the Commission the intention to propose to the Council negotiating directives for a full implementation
or only for a partial implementation of the model protocol in the NNWS of the Community, and what are the
reasons for the proposed policy?

2. Since the model protocol involves beyond dispute the national non-proliferation competences of the
Member States, will the Commission propose to the Council, for the negotiations with the IAEA and the
subsequent implementation of the model protocol in the Community, negotiation and management procedures
that will recognize the national non-proliferation competences of the Member States, or will the Commission on
the contrary propose to negotiate and implement the protocol as if it were an exclusive Euratom-competence

Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission

(16 September 1997)

1. The Commission submitted on 16 July 1997 negotiating directives to the Council under which the
Commission proposes to negotiate with the relevant non-nuclear weapon Member States and the International
atomic energy agency (IAEA) with a view to the conclusion, under Articles 101, paragraph 2 and 102 of the
Euratom Treaty, of an additional protocol to the safeguards agreement between the Community’s non-nuclear
weapon Member States, the Community and the IAEA (INFCIRC/193). It is proposed that this protocol will be
negotiated on the basis of the model protocol, which was adopted by the IAEA board of governors on 15 May
1997 as standard for the additional protocols designed for states having a comprehensive safeguards agreement
with the IAEA in order to strengthen the effectiveness and to improve the efficiency of the safeguards system as a
contribution to global nuclear non-proliferation objectives.

2. The Commission fully recognises the legal fact that several of the measures foreseen in the model protocol
currently fall within the competence of Community Member States. This is clearly reflected in its proposal to
negotiate the additional protocol together with Member States and to conclude the protocol under Article 102 of
the Euratom Treaty.