Text · Report parliamentary committee draft
On the proposal for a Council regulation establishing the nuclear decommissioning assistance programme of the Ignalina nuclear power plant in Lithuania for the period 2028-2034, and repealing Regulation (EU) 2021/101
Full title
On the proposal for a Council regulation establishing the nuclear decommissioning assistance programme of the Ignalina nuclear power plant in Lithuania for the period 2028-2034, and repealing Regulation (EU) 2021/101
Document ITRE-PR-785118 · COM(2025)0476 – C100271/2025 – 2025/0268(NLE)
- Kind
- Report parliamentary committee draft ITRE-PR-785118
- Date
- 3 March 2026
- Committee
- Committee on Industry, Research and Energy
- Rapporteur
- Virginijus Sinkevičius
- Dossier
- 2025/0268(NLE)
More facts (3)
- Formats
- Official page PDF Word
- Subject matter
- ENER
- Reference
- COM(2025)0476 – C100271/2025 – 2025/0268(NLE)
In short
A summary of the text written by AI; ¶ opens the paragraph it rests on.
AI: In short Written by AI from the official text — check the source · deepseek-flash · 17 Sept 2026
The rapporteur's draft report approves the Commission proposal for a Council regulation on the Ignalina nuclear decommissioning programme for 2028-2034, with amendments. It drops the word "indicative" from the financial envelope of EUR 678 000 000 and keeps the Union co-financing rate at 86%. It adds anti-drone protection of the site and the deep geological repository for spent fuel and radioactive waste to the programme's scope. It deletes the planned reduction of the workforce by at least one third and the Commission's power to amend the Annex by implementing acts. It limits Union funding to legal entities established in a Member State or an associated country, and requires safeguards for knowledge sharing.
Position. The rapporteur proposes to approve the Commission proposal as amended, strengthening it with targeted amendments on stable funding, anti-drone protection, technological sovereignty and inclusion of the deep geological repository.
Key points
- Parliament approves the Commission proposal as amended and calls on the Commission to alter its proposal accordingly.
- The regulation is renamed the "Ignalina Programme" and its legal basis in Protocol No 4 to the 2003 Act of Accession is emphasised.
- The financial envelope is set at EUR 678 000 000 in current prices for 1 January 2028 to 31 December 2034, without the term "indicative".
- The Union co-financing rate should be as close to 86% as possible, with the rest from Lithuania and other sources.
- The programme is to finance measures against unmanned aerial systems threatening the nuclear facility site.
- The programme is to cover disposal of spent fuel and radioactive waste in a deep geological repository and its funding.
- The requirement to cut the decommissioning workforce by at least one third compared with full-time equivalents at the end of 2024 is deleted.
- The Commission's power to amend the Annex by implementing acts is removed.
- Union funding is limited to legal entities established in a Member State or a country associated with relevant Union programmes, unless justified by security or technical necessity.
- Knowledge dissemination beyond the Union is subject to safeguards protecting sensitive technical information, critical know-how and strategic capabilities.
- The Joint Research Centre coordinates knowledge sharing, financed under INSC-D at 100% of eligible costs.
- The financial envelope may also cover technical and administrative assistance, including protection of the site against unmanned aerial systems.
Who is affected
- Lithuania: must provide co-financing and remains responsible for nuclear safety and waste management.
- Legal entities in Member States or associated countries: eligible for Union funding under the programme.
- The Joint Research Centre: coordinates and finances knowledge dissemination.
- Workers at the Ignalina plant: the planned workforce reduction is deleted, so staffing is retained.
- The Commission: must alter its proposal and may not amend the Annex by implementing acts.
Figures and deadlines
- EUR 678 000 000 in current prices, the financial envelope for 2028-2034.
- 86%, the Union co-financing rate.
- 31 December 2004 and 31 December 2009, deadlines for closure of Unit 1 and Unit 2.
- at least one third, the workforce reduction compared with full-time equivalents at the end of 2024 (deleted).
- February 2025, the drone attack on the Chernobyl NPP.
- 6.5 billion Euros, the estimated cost of final disposal.
- about 14%, Lithuania's contribution to direct decommissioning activities.
- some 88%, the share of domestic electricity demand covered by nuclear power in 1993.
Legal basis. Article 3(2) of Protocol No 4 attached to the 2003 Act of Accession.
Text
The text as parsed from the official Word file. Every paragraph has a link (¶) and can be saved to a project as a passage.
Jump to an amendment (27)
- Amendment 1
- Amendment 2
- Amendment 3
- Amendment 4
- Amendment 5
- Amendment 6
- Amendment 7
- Amendment 8
- Amendment 9
- Amendment 10
- Amendment 11
- Amendment 12
- Amendment 13
- Amendment 14
- Amendment 15
- Amendment 16
- Amendment 17
- Amendment 18
- Amendment 19
- Amendment 20
- Amendment 21
- Amendment 22
- Amendment 23
- Amendment 24
- Amendment 25
- Amendment 26
- Amendment 27
Draft european parliament legislative resolution
–having regard to the 2003 Act of Accession, and in particular Article 3(2) of Protocol No 4 attached thereto,
2.Calls on the Commission to alter its proposal accordingly, in accordance with Article 293(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;
3.Calls on the Council to notify Parliament if it intends to depart from the text approved by Parliament;
4.Asks the Council to consult Parliament again if it intends to substantially amend the Commission proposal;
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Proposal for a COUNCIL REGULATION establishing the nuclear decommissioning assistance programme of the Ignalina nuclear power plant in Lithuania for the period 2028-2034, and repealing Regulation (EU) 2021/101 | Proposal for a COUNCIL REGULATION establishing the nuclear decommissioning assistance programme of the Ignalina nuclear power plant in Lithuania (the Ignalina Programme) for the period 2028-2034, and repealing Regulation (EU) 2021/101 |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (1) In accordance with Protocol No 4 on the Ignalina nuclear power plant attached to the 2003 Act of Accession1 , Lithuania committed itself to the closure of Unit 1 and Unit 2 of the Ignalina nuclear power plant by 31 December 2004 and 31 December 2009 respectively, and to the subsequent decommissioning of those units. | (1) In accordance with Protocol No 4 on the Ignalina nuclear power plant attached to the 2003 Act of Accession1 , which constitutes the legal basis of the Ignalina Programme, Lithuania committed itself to the closure of Unit 1 and Unit 2 of the Ignalina nuclear power plant by 31 December 2004 and 31 December 2009 respectively, and to the subsequent decommissioning of those units. |
| 1 OJ L 236, 23.9.2003, p. 944, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/treaty/acc_2003/act_1/pro_4/sign. | 1 OJ L 236, 23.9.2003, p. 944, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/treaty/acc_2003/act_1/pro_4/sign. |
It is important to emphasise that the provisions of Protocol No 4 of the Lithuanian Accession Treaty, which form the basis of the programme, remain valid.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (2) In accordance with its obligations under the Act of Accession and with Union assistance, Lithuania shut down the two units within the respective deadlines and made significant progress towards their decommissioning. Further work is necessary in order to continue the decrease of the level of radiological hazard. Based on the available estimates, additional financial resources are required for this purpose beyond 2027. | (2) In accordance with its obligations under the Act of Accession and with Union assistance, Lithuania shut down the two units within the respective deadlines and made significant progress towards their decommissioning. Further work is necessary in order to continue the decrease of the level of radiological hazard. Based on the available estimates, substantial additional financial resources are required for this purpose beyond 2027. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (3) The decommissioning of the nuclear power plant covered by this Regulation is to be carried out in accordance with Union legislation on nuclear safety, namely Council Directive 2009/71/Euratom2 , and waste management, namely Council Directive 2011/70/Euratom3 . Pursuant to this legislation, the ultimate responsibility for nuclear safety and for the safety of spent fuel and radioactive waste management remains with Lithuania. | (3) The decommissioning of the nuclear power plant covered by this Regulation is to be carried out in accordance with Union legislation on nuclear safety, namely Council Directive 2009/71/Euratom2, and waste management, namely Council Directive 2011/70/Euratom3 . Pursuant to this legislation, the ultimate responsibility for nuclear safety and for the safety of spent fuel and radioactive waste management remains with Lithuania. While that Directive provides that the costs of managing spent fuel and radioactive waste are to be borne by those who generated those materials, it may be considered that this provision cannot reasonably be applied retroactively to Lithuania. Given that the financial burden associated with those activities exceeds the total costs of the decommissioning programme, it is important to ensure that Lithuania is not left to bear that responsibility alone. |
| 2 Council Directive 2009/71/Euratom of 25 June 2009 establishing a Community framework for the nuclear safety of nuclear installations (OJ L 172, 2.7.2009, p. 18, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2009/71/oj). | 2 Council Directive 2009/71/Euratom of 25 June 2009 establishing a Community framework for the nuclear safety of nuclear installations (OJ L 172, 2.7.2009, p. 18, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2009/71/oj). |
| 3 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). | 3 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). |
Lithuania prematurely closed the Ignalina NPP before the adoption of the Directive and was therefore not in a position to accumulate sufficient funds for the storage and disposal of spent fuel and radioactive waste. Also, the Ignalina Programme is a decommissioning support programme; the deep repository is intended for the disposal of long-lived waste, including spent nuclear fuel and irradiated graphite, and graphite is waste generated during decommissioning, so it is logical that it should be financed from the decommissioning programme.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (4) Recognising that the early shutdown and consequent decommissioning of the Ignalina nuclear power plant with two 1 500 MW RBMK-type reactor units inherited from the Soviet Union was of an unprecedented nature and represented for Lithuania an exceptional financial burden not commensurate with the size and economic strength of the country, Protocol No 4 to the 2003 Act of Accession stated that the Union assistance under the nuclear decommissioning assistance programme of the Ignalina nuclear power plant in Lithuania (the ‘Programme’) is to be seamlessly continued and extended beyond 2006, for the period of the next Financial Perspectives. | (4) Recognising that the premature shutdown and consequent decommissioning of the Ignalina nuclear power plant with two 1 500 MW RBMK-type reactor units, which are similar to – but more powerful than – those used in the Chernobyl Nuclear power plant (‘Chernobyl NPP’ ), inherited from the Soviet Union was of an unprecedented nature and represented for Lithuania an exceptional financial burden not commensurate with the size and economic strength of the country, Protocol No 4 to the 2003 Act of Accession stated that the Union assistance under the nuclear decommissioning assistance programme of the Ignalina nuclear power plant in Lithuania (the ‘Ignalina Programme’) is to be seamlessly continued and extended beyond 2006, for the period of the next Financial Perspectives. The original principles of the Programme, as stipulated by the Protocol, state that “the extended Ignalina programme shall be based on the same elements and principles as described in Article 2 of the Protocol, including measures to enhance the security of energy supply and improving energy efficiency in Lithuania”. However, in order to ensure transparent and efficient use of funds, the ongoing Ignalina Programme, as agreed by Lithuania, is focused only on the decommissioning process, thereby maximising efficiency of funding. |
It is important to note that although the scope of Protocol No. 4 would allow Lithuania to demand financial support to enhance energy supply security and efficiency, Lithuania agreed to limit the scope of the programme to the decommissioning of the Ignalina Nuclear Power Plant to ensure the transparent and efficient use of funds.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (5) This Regulation lays down an indicative financial envelope for the Programme. | (5) This Regulation lays down a financial envelope for the Programme for the period 2028-2034. |
In the Rapporteur’s view, the term “indicative” is misleading, as it implies uncertainty about the Programme’s funding level. During the next MFF, dismantling of the reactor cores will begin, and once started, this work cannot be interrupted. Any funding uncertainty therefore raises serious nuclear safety concerns.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (7) In a rapidly changing economic, social and geopolitical environment, recent experience has shown the need for a more flexible multiannual financial framework and Union spending programmes. To that effect, and in line with the objectives of the Programme, the funding should duly consider the evolving policy needs and Union priorities as identified in relevant documents published by the Commission, in European Parliament resolutions, and Council conclusions, while ensuring sufficient predictability for the budget implementation. | (7) In a rapidly changing economic, social and geopolitical environment, recent experience has shown the need for a more flexible multiannual financial framework and Union spending programmes. To that effect, and in line with the objectives of the Programme, the funding, while ensuring the full delivery of the budget allocation for the period 2028-2034 and sufficient predictability for budget implementation, should duly consider the evolving policy needs and Union priorities as identified in relevant documents published by the Commission, in European Parliament resolutions, and Council conclusions. |
During the next MFF, dismantling of the reactor cores will begin, and once started, this work cannot be interrupted. Any funding uncertainty therefore raises serious nuclear safety concerns.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (13) The Programme should involve the creation of knowledge and the sharing of experience. Knowledge and experience gained and lessons learnt under the Programme with regard to the nuclear decommissioning process and waste management should be disseminated across the Union and beyond, in coordination and synergy with the Commission’s nuclear installations at the Joint Research Centre (JRC) sites, as such measures bring the greatest Union added value and contribute to the safety of the workers and the general public as well as protection of the environment. The scope, procedure and economic aspects of cooperation should be detailed in multiannual work programmes and could also be subject to agreements between the Member States or between the Member States and the Commission. | (13) The Programme should involve the creation of knowledge and the sharing of experience. Knowledge and experience gained and lessons learnt under the Programme with regard to the nuclear decommissioning process and waste management should be disseminated across the Union and – under certain conditions – beyond, in coordination and synergy with the Commission’s nuclear installations at the Joint Research Centre (JRC) sites, as such measures bring the greatest Union added value and contribute to the safety of the workers and the general public as well as protection of the environment. The scope, procedure and economic aspects of cooperation should be detailed in multiannual work programmes and could also be subject to agreements between the Member States or between the Member States and the Commission. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (14) The JRC should facilitate the dissemination of knowledge on nuclear decommissioning among different Union stakeholders in a coordinated way, for example by carrying out market analysis, reviews and assessments of knowledge needs in the Union and, where relevant, third countries, identifying potential directions for cooperation, interested stakeholders and spheres in which knowledge created in the implementation of the Programme would bring the greatest added value, and developing formats for knowledge sharing. The dissemination of knowledge created should be financed by the JRC. Any Member State should be able to initiate the development of ties and exchanges for knowledge dissemination. Where relevant, such exchanges could involve third countries, in consistency and complementarity with actions carried out under Regulation [XXX] of the European Parliament and of the Council12 [Global Europe] and Council Regulation [XXX]13 [INSC-D]. | (14) The JRC should facilitate the dissemination of knowledge on nuclear decommissioning among different Union stakeholders in a coordinated way, for example by carrying out market analysis, reviews and assessments of knowledge needs in the Union and, where relevant, third countries, identifying potential directions for cooperation, interested stakeholders and spheres in which knowledge created in the implementation of the Programme would bring the greatest added value, and developing formats for knowledge sharing. The dissemination of knowledge created should be financed by the JRC. Any Member State should be able to initiate the development of ties and exchanges for knowledge dissemination. Where relevant, such exchanges could involve like-minded third countries, in consistency and complementarity with actions carried out under Regulation [XXX] of the European Parliament and of the Council[1] [Global Europe] and Council Regulation [XXX][2] [INSC-D]. In order to strengthen the Union’s technological sovereignty and strategic autonomy in the nuclear decommissioning sector, knowledge generated under the Programme should primarily reinforce Union industrial and technological capacities, while the dissemination beyond the Union should be conducted in a manner which safeguards the Union’s security interests, intellectual property, and technological leadership. |
| 12 OJ L.., p. | |
| 13 OJ L.., p. |
Important to share the knowledge with strategic partners. Sharing the knowledge indiscriminately, risks empowering Europe’s competitors at the expense of the European interest, including, geopolitical rivals.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (15) The decommissioning of the Ignalina nuclear power plant should be carried out with recourse to the best available technical expertise, and with due regard to the nature and technological specifications of the installations to be decommissioned, in order to ensure safety and the highest possible efficiency, taking into account international best practices. | (15) The decommissioning of the Ignalina nuclear power plant should be carried out with recourse to the best available technical expertise, and with due regard to the nature and technological specifications of the installations to be decommissioned, in order to ensure safety and the highest possible efficiency, taking into account European and international best practices. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (15a) Taking into account the evolving security environment and the threats posed to strategic infrastructure by unmanned aerial systems, in particular the drone attack on the Chernobyl NPP in February 2025 and the substantial damage caused to the protective shield covering the Chernobyl nuclear reactor, the Ignalina Programme should also be used to finance measures to increase the security of the nuclear facility site from such threats. |
Ignalina nuclear facility is critical and security-related infrastructure and must be adequately protected during the decommissioning process. Protective measures against drones are necessary to safeguard the population and the environment, as damage to the nuclear facility could result in radioactive contamination and other serious cross-border consequences.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (16) Increased efficiency of the Programme implementation should be achieved via a proportionate reduction of the workforce operating on decommissioning activities at the Ignalina nuclear power plant. In view of the dismantling activities to be performed during 2028-2034 and considering the choice of the Ignalina nuclear power plant to outsource the full dismantling of reactor shaft central zones, the reduction of the workforce involved in the decommissioning activities should be at least one third compared to the number of full-time equivalent (FTE) at the end of 2024. | deleted |
Committing in advance to a substantial workforce reduction before the outsourcing process is successfully completed would create unnecessary operational risk. It is therefore prudent to retain sufficient skilled personnel until a reliable and fully secured outsourcing arrangement is in place.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (18) It should be possible to review the amount of the appropriations allocated to the Programme as well as the programming period based on the results of an implementation report. | deleted |
During the period of the next MFF, the works on dismantling of the reactor cores will be started. With this in mind, the funding uncertainty raises concerns in terms of nuclear safety as the works on the reactor core, once started, cannot be interrupted.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (20) Activities under the Programme should be conducted with a joint financial effort by the Union and Lithuania. A maximum Union co-financing threshold has been established in line with the co-financing practice established under the predecessor programmes. Taking into account the practice of comparable Union programmes and the strengthened Lithuanian economy, from the inception of the Programme until the end of the implementation of the activities financed under this Regulation, the Union co-financing rate should be no higher than 86% of eligible costs. The remaining co-financing should be provided by Lithuania and sources other than the Union budget, such as international financial institutions and other donors. | (20) Activities under the Programme should be conducted with a joint financial effort by the Union and Lithuania. A Union co-financing threshold has been established in line with the co-financing practice established under the predecessor programmes. Taking into account the practice of comparable Union programmes and the strengthened Lithuanian economy, from the inception of the Programme until the end of the implementation of the activities financed under this Regulation, the Union co-financing rate should be as close to 86% as possible of eligible costs. The remaining co-financing should be provided by Lithuania and sources other than the Union budget, such as international financial institutions and other donors. Since the beginning of the Programme, Lithuania has contributed about 14% to direct decommissioning activities. However, as the Ignalina Programme does not cover certain related activities, including physical and fire safety, Lithuania’s actual contribution is higher. At the same time, Lithuania continues to bear full responsibility for the socio-economic development of Visaginas, a city, which was purpose- built in connection with the construction and operation of the nuclear power plant and which remains significantly affected by highest unemployment rates due to the premature closure of the plant. |
In the current programme the co-financing rate was kept at 86%, and it is important to ensure that the EU support in the new programme remains at this level.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (a) to assist Lithuania in implementing the decommissioning of the Ignalina nuclear power plant, with specific emphasis on managing the radiological safety challenges and optimising the efficiency of the programme implementation via a proportionate reduction of workforce; | (a) to adequately assist Lithuania in implementing the decommissioning of the Ignalina nuclear power plant, with specific emphasis on managing the radiological safety challenges; |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| The knowledge referred to in point (b) of the first subparagraph shall be disseminated at Union level, and beyond, in all relevant areas, developing potential Union synergies, under programme Instrument for Nuclear Safety Cooperation and Decommissioning (INSC-D), as set out in Article [X] of Regulation (Euratom) [XXX]. | The knowledge referred to in point (b) of the first subparagraph shall be disseminated at Union level, and, under certain conditions, beyond, in all relevant areas, developing potential Union synergies, under programme Instrument for Nuclear Safety Cooperation and Decommissioning (INSC-D), as set out in Article [X] of Regulation (Euratom) [XXX]. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2. The Joint Research Centre shall coordinate the structuring and dissemination of knowledge, referred to in paragraph 1, first subparagraph, point (b), to Member States and, when relevant, third countries. Those activities shall be financed under the INSC-D programme and funded by the Union at 100% of eligible costs. | 2. The Joint Research Centre shall coordinate the structuring and dissemination of knowledge, referred to in paragraph 1, first subparagraph, point (b), to Member States and, when relevant and under certain conditions, third countries. Those activities shall be financed under the INSC-D programme and funded by the Union at 100% of eligible costs. Knowledge dissemination shall be subject to appropriate safeguards which ensure that sensitive technical information, critical know-how and strategic capabilities developed with Union funding are protected against uncontrolled transfer or misuse. |
Sharing the knowledge indiscriminately, risks empowering Europe’s competitors, including geopolitical rivals at the expense of the Union’s interest.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. The specific objective of the Programme shall be to carry out the engineering, dismantling and decontamination of the Ignalina equipment and reactor shafts in accordance with the decommissioning plan, including the management of radioactive waste resulting from the decommissioning activities, and to continue with the safe management of the decommissioning and legacy waste. | 3. The specific objective of the Programme shall be to carry out the engineering, dismantling and decontamination of the Ignalina equipment and reactor shafts in accordance with the decommissioning plan, including the management of radioactive waste resulting from the decommissioning activities, and to continue with the safe management of the decommissioning and legacy waste. Taking into account the evolving security environment and the threats posed to strategic infrastructure by unmanned aerial systems, the Programme shall be used to finance measures to increase the security of the nuclear facility site from such threats. |
In recent years, nuclear power plants have become target of military strikes - for instance in February 2025, when a drone has caused nearly irreparable damage to the sarcophagus of the Chernobyl reactor, resulting in significant economic cost. Therefore, the Rapporteur proposes to include the anti-drone protection of the site within the scope of the Programme, to safeguard the population and prevent environmental and economic losses. This would also serve to protect the investments the Union has made over the years into the decommissioning of this object.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. The detailed description of the specific objective referred to in paragraph 3 of this Article is set out in the Annex. The Commission may amend, by means of implementing acts, the Annex. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 11(2). | 4. The detailed description of the specific objective referred to in paragraph 3 of this Article is set out in the Annex. |
The Annex is important part of the regulation therefore it should not be modified after the regulation has been adopted.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. The indicative financial envelope for the implementation of the Programme for the period from 1 January 2028 to 31 December 2034 is set at EUR 678 000 000 in current prices. | 1. The financial envelope for the implementation of the Programme for the period from 1 January 2028 to 31 December 2034 is set at EUR 678 000 000 in current prices. |
In the Rapporteur’s view, the term “indicative” is misleading, as it implies uncertainty about the Programme’s funding level. During the next MFF, dismantling of the reactor cores will begin, and once started, this work cannot be interrupted. Any funding uncertainty therefore raises serious nuclear safety concerns.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. The financial envelope referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article and the amounts of additional resources referred to in Article 5 may also be used for technical and administrative assistance for the implementation of the Programme, such as preparatory, monitoring, control, audit and evaluation activities, corporate information technology systems and platforms, information communication and visibility activities, including corporate communication on the political priorities of the Union, and all other technical and administrative assistance or staff-related expenses incurred by the Commission for the management of the Programme. | 4. The financial envelope referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article and the amounts of additional resources referred to in Article 5 may also be used for technical and administrative assistance for the implementation of the Programme, such as preparatory, monitoring, control, audit and evaluation activities, corporate information technology systems and platforms, information communication and visibility activities, including corporate communication on the political priorities of the Union, and all other technical and administrative assistance or staff-related expenses incurred by the Commission for the management of the Programme, as well as for the protection of the site against unmanned aerial systems. |
In recent years, nuclear power plants have become target of military strikes - for instance in February 2025, when a drone has caused nearly irreparable damage to the sarcophagus of the Chernobyl reactor, resulting in significant economic cost. Therefore, the Rapporteur proposes to include the anti-drone protection of the site within the scope of the Programme, to safeguard the population and prevent environmental and economic losses. This would also serve to protect the investments the Union has made over the years into the decommissioning of this object.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Only activities implementing the objectives set out in Article 3 shall be eligible for Union funding. | 1. Only activities implementing the objectives set out in Article 3 shall be eligible for Union funding. Union funding under the Programme shall be limited to legal entities established in a Member State or in a country associated with relevant Union programmes, unless otherwise justified by duly substantiated security or technical necessity. |
Limiting eligibility would strengthen the protection of sensitive technologies, critical infrastructure and strategic know-how. It would also support the Union’s objective of reinforcing technological sovereignty and strategic autonomy. Exceptions can be made only by substantial security or technical necessity.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| The overall maximum Union co-financing rate applicable under the Programme shall be no higher than 86%. The remaining financing shall be provided by Lithuania and additional sources other than the Union budget. | The overall Union co-financing rate applicable under the Programme shall be as close to 86% as possible. The remaining financing shall be provided by Lithuania and additional sources other than the Union budget. |
In the current programme the co-financing rate was kept at 86%, and it is important to ensure that the EU support in the new programme remains at this level.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (II) The Ignalina nuclear power plant (INPP) reorganisation and proportionate reduction of workforce (employees) involved in the decommissioning programme. In view of the scheduled dismantling activities and considering the choice of the INPP to outsource the full dismantling of reactor shaft central zones, the reduction of the workforce involved in the decommissioning activities shall be at least one third compared to the number of full-time equivalent (FTE) at the end of 2024. Progress has to be measured with respect to specific Key Performance Indicators approved in the implementing work programmes. | deleted |
Committing in advance to a substantial workforce reduction before the outsourcing process is successfully completed would create unnecessary operational risk. It is therefore prudent to retain sufficient skilled personnel until a reliable and fully secured outsourcing arrangement is in place.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (IVa) The protection of the nuclear facility from aerial threats posed by unmanned systems. |
In recent years, nuclear power plants have become target of military strikes - for instance in February 2025, when a drone has caused nearly irreparable damage to the sarcophagus of the Chernobyl reactor, resulting in significant economic cost. Therefore, the Rapporteur proposes to include the anti-drone protection of the site within the scope of the Programme, to safeguard the population and prevent environmental and economic losses. This would also serve to protect the investments the Union has made over the years into the decommissioning of this object.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (IVb) The disposal of spent fuel and radioactive waste in a deep geological repository and the funding for the realisation of a deep geological repository. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| The specific objective set out in Article 3(3) shall not cover the disposal of spent fuel and radioactive waste in a deep geological repository and the funding for the realisation of a deep geological repository. | deleted |
Lithuania prematurely closed the Ignalina NPP before the adoption of the Directive and was therefore not in a position to accumulate sufficient funds for the storage and disposal of spent fuel and radioactive waste. Also, the Ignalina Programme is a decommissioning support programme; the deep repository is intended for the disposal of long-lived waste, including spent nuclear fuel and irradiated graphite, and graphite is waste generated during decommissioning, so it is logical that it should be financed from the decommissioning programme. Also, the Ignalina Programme is a decommissioning support programme; the deep repository is intended for the disposal of long-lived waste, including spent nuclear fuel and irradiated graphite, and graphite is waste generated during decommissioning, so it is logical that it should be financed from the decommissioning programme.
Back matter, 1
Parts that accompany the text rather than belong to it: explanatory statement, annexes, opinions appended by other committees. Collapsed.
Explanatory statement 16 blocks
Decommissioning of the Ignalina nuclear power plant (INPP) is a first-of-a-kind, highly technically complex challenge for the European nuclear safety. It is also about the EU delivering on its commitment to solidarity with Lithuania.
Under Protocol No. 4 of Lithuania’s EU Accession Treaty, the country was required to prematurely close the Ignalina nuclear power plant due to serious safety concerns in Europe. The graphite-moderated Chernobyl-type reactors, although significantly more powerful, lacked full containment, and were inherently unsafe due to a fundamentally flawed design. Politically, closing the plant was a very difficult decision for Lithuania, where nuclear power, at its peak in 1993, covered some 88% of domestic electricity demand. However, the decision was taken in the interest of safety of Europe and based on a clear promise enshrined in the Accession Treaty: that the European Union would provide “adequate” financial assistance for the decommissioning of the Soviet-era plant.
The Rapporteur welcomes the proposed Regulation which sets the amount and conditions for the next MFF 2028-2034. Discontinuing the Programme would have undermined the credibility of the Union.
However, the Rapporteur aims to further strengthen the proposal, especially taking the account current geopolitical challenges, through a series of targeted amendments:
The Rapporteur welcomes the Commission’s proposal to set the Programme’s funding in the next MFF at EUR 678 000 000 in current prices. However, both in the recitals and in the main text, this amount is referred to as “indicative” (“indicative financial envelope “), potentially implying that this amount is negotiable and can be reduced. This is disconcerting, particularly as this was not the case in the previous periods. The rapporteur considers the term “indicative” as misleading: it could reduce confidence that the Programme will be funded adequately. During the next MFF, the dismantling of the reactor cores will begin, and once started, this work cannot be interrupted to prevent risks and radiological hazards. Any funding uncertainty therefore raises serious nuclear safety concerns.
The physical protection of the plant currently falls outside of the Ignalina Programme’s scope and remains the responsibility of the Lithuanian state. However, in recent years, nuclear power plants have become target of military strikes - for instance in February 2025, when a drone has caused nearly irreparable damage to the sarcophagus of the Chernobyl reactor, resulting in significant economic cost. Therefore, the Rapporteur proposes to include the anti-drone protection of the site within the scope of the Programme, to safeguard the population and prevent environmental and economic losses. This would also serve to protect the investments the Union has made over the years into the decommissioning of this object.
It is the view of the Rapporteur that Union funding under the Ignalina Programme should be limited to legal entities established in a Member State or in a country associated to relevant Union programmes, unless otherwise justified by duly substantiated security or technical necessity. Limiting eligibility would strengthen the protection of sensitive technologies, critical infrastructure and strategic know-how. It would also support the Union’s objective of reinforcing technological sovereignty and strategic autonomy. Exceptions can be made only by substantial security or technical necessity.
In order to strengthen the Union’s technological sovereignty and strategic autonomy in the nuclear decommissioning sector, knowledge generated under the Programme should primarily reinforce Union industrial and technological capacities, while dissemination beyond the Union should be conducted in a manner that safeguards the Union’s security interests, intellectual property, and technological leadership.
Sharing the knowledge indiscriminately risks empowering Europe’s competitors, including geopolitical rivals at the expense of the Union’s interest.
The Commission’s proposal excludes the disposal of spent fuel and radioactive waste in deep geological repository, while the Rapporteur calls for keeping it in the Programme.
Due to the premature shutdown, INPP was unable to generate financial resources for the final disposal of spent fuel and radioactive waste generated during its operation and fulfil its responsibility as a radioactive waste generator as provided for in the Article 9 of the Council Directive 2011/70/Euratom and national legal acts.
Although Lithuania should take due responsibility for spent fuel and radioactive waste management, including final disposal, the magnitude of the financial burden placed on Lithuania (to co-finance INPP decommissioning and simultaneously fund the implementation of the deep geological repository) puts Lithuania in an exceptionally problematic situation. The cost of the final disposal is estimated at staggering 6.5 billion Euros. EU solidarity therefore must be also reflected in financial support for Lithuania‘s effort to implement final disposal solutions and avoid undue burden for future generations.
Connections
The dossier, the decisions on this text and its other versions.
No connections found for this item.
Sources & citation
Where the facts on this page come from, and how to cite it.
- Data source
- Licensed CC BY 4.0.
- Retrieved
- 25 September 2026
Cite as
European Parliament (2026). “DRAFT REPORT on the proposal for a Council regulation establishing the nuclear decommissioning assistance programme of the Ignalina nuclear power plant in Lithuania for the period 2028-2034, and repealing Regulation (EU) 2021/101”. Text, 3 March 2026. docId ITRE-PR-785118. EU Parl Watch Research. https://news.eu-parl.st-solutions.dev/texts/ITRE-PR-785118 (retrieved 25 September 2026). Data: EP Open Data API: document record, https://data.europarl.europa.eu/api/v2/documents/ITRE-PR-785118 (CC BY 4.0).
BibTeX
@misc{epw-text-itre-pr-785118,
author = {{European Parliament}},
title = {{DRAFT REPORT on the proposal for a Council regulation establishing the nuclear decommissioning assistance programme of the Ignalina nuclear power plant in Lithuania for the period 2028-2034, and repealing Regulation (EU) 2021/101}},
year = {2026},
date = {2026-03-03},
howpublished = {\url{https://news.eu-parl.st-solutions.dev/texts/ITRE-PR-785118}},
url = {https://news.eu-parl.st-solutions.dev/texts/ITRE-PR-785118},
urldate = {2026-09-25},
publisher = {EU Parl Watch Research},
note = {Text. docId ITRE-PR-785118. Data: EP Open Data API: document record (CC BY 4.0)}
}